CONCEPT MAPS COLLABORATIVE CREATION IN PRODUCT LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT
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
Abstract One of the greatest challenges of effectively managing knowledge in an organization is promoting seamless connections of operations between departments, the Product Lifecycle Management paradigm. It is also a paradigm that fosters organizational adaptability and quick change in production. Historically, information systems supporting operations have been developed with a specific department's culture in background. Due to this legacy, connecting data, information systems and people across the product lifecycle is an ongoing puzzle for organizations. Theorists and practicians agree on the need to include employees' expertise and vision in this process. However, this involves multiple perspectives and needs that are different but equally valid make. This study explores a tacit knowledge capture tool to be used as a means to voice the interaction and negotiation among employees. Through its influence on ontologies, concept maps collaborative creation can provide a usability tool focused on meaning throughout the product lifecycle. A literature review of the challenges involved and of the proposed tool is presented, followed by a use case and concluded with recommendations drawn from theory and practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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