MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944187743 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v8n3p13

University’s Enterprise Architecture Design Using Enterprise Architecture Planning (EAP) Based on the Zachman’s Framework Approach

2019· article· en· W2944187743 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hari Supriadi, Endang Amalia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnterprise architectureEnterprise architecture frameworkEnterprise architecture managementNIST Enterprise Architecture ModelBlueprintBusiness architectureSolution architectureView modelEnterprise integrationApplications architectureThe Open Group Architecture FrameworkComputer scienceEnterprise life cycleData architectureEnterprise information security architectureProcess managementEnterprise planning systemKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringReference architectureArchitectureEnterprise softwareEngineeringSoftware architectureBusiness processOperations managementOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information Technology Organization of an enterprise must have a framework of guidelines for the development of information system and adequate documentation of the systems and technology, so that further information could be given to devising a comprehensive and integrated system. Enterprise architecture is a conceptual blueprint that defines the structure and operation of an organization. There are numbers of processes or methodologies that can be used in the development of enterprise architecture products, one of them is an Enterprise Architecture Planning (Enterprise Architecture Planning/EAP) based on the Zachman’s framework. Enterprise Architecture Planning is a compilation consisting of the following business model documents, IRC documents, data architecture applications, Data architecture blueprints, architectural blueprints, and the roadmap plan technology of Enterprise Architecture Planning.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207