MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

System Dynamics Based Learning Environments

2008· book-chapter· en· W2796837476 on OpenAlexaff
Hassan Qudrat‐Ullah

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic sectorTask (project management)Computer scienceSystem dynamicsManagement scienceSpace (punctuation)Dynamics (music)Resource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementProcess managementOperations researchArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSystems engineeringPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing a public sector organization is a highly complex task involving multiple stakeholders coupled with informational and resource material flows. Decision making in such complex tasks, for example heath-care system, presents challenges. On one hand, the complexity of public sector organizations does not lend itself well to real-world trial and error approach. Practical, political, and/or ethical constraints often restrict any experimentation with many real-world phenomena such as medical decision-making, hazardwaste management, climate change, and so forth. On the other hand, most of the real-world “decisions and their consequences” are hardly related in both time and space, which makes learning even harder to occur (Hogarth, 1981; Sterman, 1989). Recent advancements in computer technology, together with developments in system dynamics simulation methods, provide a potential solution that involves design and development of the decision support systems to aid decision making in complex public sector systems (Qudrat-Ullah, 2005). In this paper we argue that system- dynamics-based interactive learning environments (SDILEs) could serve as an effective decision support system for public sector management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207