MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892327751 · doi:10.1504/ijpom.2018.10015895

Fleet planning and technology upgrade projects: supporting decision-making through visualisation

2018· article· en· W2892327751 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Project Organisation and Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineVisualizationUpgradeStakeholderEngineeringEngineering managementNavySystems engineeringComputer scienceProcess managementManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In project planning, visualisations can be powerful tools for communication and in supporting decision-making between stakeholders. However the graphical elements, in terms of form and presentational style, are typically poorly treated and can therefore diminish both the impact and conveyance of information. Traditional timeline representations need to be adapted and modified in order to meet the requirements of specific stakeholder groups and thus fulfil their role as effective visual boundary objects. This paper describes the visualisation designed and developed for the planning of technology upgrade projects across a fleet of military platforms. A real-world application of the visualisation is provided through an illustrative case study based on the front-line fleet of Type 23 frigates of the Royal Navy.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · 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