MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620819614

The Effects of Operational and Cognitive Compatibilities on the Big Data Analytics Usage: Firm Distinctive Value Creation.

2017· article· en· W2620819614 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Ghasemaghaei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataAnalyticsComputer scienceValue (mathematics)Data scienceValue creationCognitionKnowledge managementBusinessData miningPsychologyMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using big data analytics is generally considered to improve firms’ distinctive value creation. However, we argue here that the role of firm operational and cognitive compatibilities needs to be better understood in order to explore how organizations can create distinctive value from the use of big data analytics. This research-in-progress study draws on the theory of resource-based view (RBV) and information technology (IT) compatibility literature to develop a theoretical model explaining how big data analytics usage influences firm distinctive value creation, and whether firm operational and cognitive compatibilities impact the use of big data analytics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207