MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981415295 · doi:10.4018/ijitsa.2020010102

Risk Management via Digital Dashboards in Statistics Data Centers

2019· article· en· W2981415295 on OpenAlex
Atif Amin, Raul Valverde, Malleswara Talla

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 Information Technologies and Systems Approach · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDashboardComputer scienceRisk managementRisk analysis (engineering)Data scienceData centerBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every system, when connected to a network, is susceptible to threat of being hacked. It is important to protect all systems of an organization in real-time in a cost-effective manner. This article presents a well-designed and integrated database for risk management data using a dashboard interface in real-time risk that makes it easy for risk managers to reach a understanding the level of threats to be able to apply right controls to mitigate them. In this article, a case study of a data center for a statistical management institute is presented that proposes the calculation of total risk at the organization level by using the proposed risk database. A digital dashboard is also designed for presenting the risk level results so that decision makers can apply counter measures. The risk level on a dashboard viewer makes it easy for decision maker to understand the overall risk level at the statistics data center and assists in the creation of a tool to follow-up risk management since the time a threat hits until the time of its mitigation.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.228 · 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