MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805997022 · doi:10.4236/ti.2018.92009

Development of a Model with Critical Factors of Success, Predominant in Implementation of a Membrane System in the Wastewater Treatment—Review of the Case Study of a Dairy Industry

2018· article· en· W2805997022 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julio Americo Faitão, Juliana Steffens, Clarice Steffens, Rogério Marcos Dallago, Adriana T. Storti, Airton Campanhola Bortoluzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticReuseCritical success factorComputer scienceOrder (exchange)Process managementWastewaterOperations managementOperations researchRisk analysis (engineering)Knowledge managementBusinessStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to identify the critical success factors (CSFs) that predict, in a specific niche, the dairy sector in Brazil and later monitor their behaviors behavior when applied together with the project management activity, along with a case study where the extrapolation of the implementation of wastewater treatment by the combined membrane system was carried out. In order to develop the case, the hypothetical-deductive method was adopted and later the content analysis was carried out through the Sphinx Lexical (qualitative analysis) computer system, data clusters and quantitative data validation was performed with SPSS Statistic, allowing to understand CSF of classification. In applying this methodology, after grouping factors in the company, one can verify the existence of implicit relationships of the FCSs, impacting mainly on the organizational aspects, especially related to the effective communication and the need for managerial support in the decision making as the most representative and factors related to risk planning and analysis. As for the explicit impact of the factors with the organization, one can verify the predominance of cost factors, and the possibility of reusing water.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicERP Systems Implementation and ImpactFrench-language works237,207