Knowledge Management for Cybersecurity in Business Organizations: A Case Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge management (KM) plays important roles in cybersecurity. This study collects five real-life cases of good practices of KM for the domain of cybersecurity in business organizations. Through an iterative process of team-based qualitative data analysis of the five cases, the study develops a model of KM for cybersecurity that conceptualizes three common aspects of KM practices for cybersecurity in business organizations. First, KM for cybersecurity in business organizations has clear specialized organizational structures that involve three inter-organizational tiers across the organization boundaries. Second, the knowledge flows of KM for cybersecurity in business organizations emphasize on explicit, declarative, and specific knowledge. Third, in comparison with KM for other domains, KM for cybersecurity has well-defined objective measures to assess the effectiveness of KM. The domain-specific KM model based on the good practice cases provides a road-map for KM practices in the domain of cybersecurity in business organizations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it