MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237799823 · doi:10.21236/ada512354

People Capability Maturity Model (P-CMM) Version 2.0, Second Edition

2009· report· en· W4237799823 on OpenAlexaff
Bill Curtis, Sally A. Miller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)
FundersDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationAustralian GovernmentSociety for Sedimentary GeologyCarnegie Mellon UniversityU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Capability Maturity ModelComputer scienceProgramming languagePsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1.1 The Process Maturity Framework 1.2 Organizational Maturity 1.3 What Is the People CMM? 1.4 Factors Driving the Demand for the People CMM 1.5 What Is the Process Maturity Framework?1.6 Why Did the People CMM Emerge in the Software Industry?

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.011

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
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
GenreOther

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

Citations78
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207