MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254871415 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-12984

A Framework to Study the Resilience of Organizations: A Case Study of a Nuclear Emergency Plan

2018· dissertation· en· W4254871415 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Ruiz-Martín

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsResilience (materials science)ArchitectureProcess (computing)Plan (archaeology)Context (archaeology)EngineeringProcess managementOrganizational architectureEmergency managementComputer scienceSystems engineeringManagement scienceKnowledge managementRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, building resilience is a key topic in many research fields such as Management, Engineering, Psychology or Ecology.The frequency increase of natural and anthropogenic disasters and the consciousness about their effects are among the reasons why resilience has gained importance and Governments are investing money in boosting the resilience of organizations, infrastructure, cities, individuals, etc.However, there is not much research on specific methodologies to design resilient organizations.A main goal of our research is to improve this aspect providing a framework to design resilient organizations.We explain how to design resilient organizations based on the Viable System Model principles.Then, we focus on an important aspect for being resilient: the communications.We use as a case study a Nuclear Emergency Plan from Spain to show the applicability of our framework.Since the communications in an organization can be modeled as a diffusion process in multiplex networks, and we did not find any suitable architecture to study them in the context of our case study, the architecture we design in this thesis is generic and allows us to model and simulate any kind of diffusion process in a dynamic multiplex network.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207