From Representation to Mediation: A New Agenda for Conceptual Modeling Research in a Digital World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of information systems (IS) as representations of real-world systems is changing in an increasingly digitalized world, suggesting that conceptual modeling is losing its relevance to the IS field. We argue the opposite: Conceptual modeling research is more relevant to the IS field than ever, but it requires an update with new theory. We develop a new theoretical framework of conceptual modeling that delivers a fundamental shift in the assumptions that govern research in this area. This move can make traditional knowledge about conceptual modeling consistent with the emerging requirements of a digital world. Our framework draws attention to the role of conceptual modeling scripts as mediators between physical and digital realities. We identify new research questions about grammars, methods, scripts, agents, and contexts that are situated in intertwined physical and digital realities. We discuss several implications for conceptual modeling scholarship that relate to the necessity of developing new methods and grammars for conceptual modeling, broadening the methodological array of conceptual modeling scholarship, and considering new dependent variables.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.083 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".