MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281663745 · doi:10.1108/aci-02-2022-0048

Autonomous cycles of data analysis tasks for innovation processes in MSMEs

2022· article· en· W4281663745 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Gutiérrez, José Aguilar, Ana María Ortega, Edwin Montoya

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Computing and Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)OriginalityTask (project management)Process managementKnowledge managementSet (abstract data type)ImplementationInnovation managementData scienceSoftware engineeringBusinessSystems engineeringCreativityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The authors propose the concept of “Autonomic Cycle for innovation processes,” which defines a set of tasks of data analysis, whose objective is to improve the innovation process in micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs). Design/methodology/approach The authors design autonomic cycles where each data analysis task interacts with each other and has different roles: some of them must observe the innovation process, others must analyze and interpret what happens in it, and finally, others make decisions in order to improve the innovation process. Findings In this article, the authors identify three innovation sub-processes which can be applied to autonomic cycles, which allow interoperating the actors of innovation processes (data, people, things and services). These autonomic cycles define an innovation problem, specify innovation requirements, and finally, evaluate the results of the innovation process, respectively. Finally, the authors instance/apply the autonomic cycle of data analysis tasks to determine the innovation problem in the textile industry. Research limitations/implications It is necessary to implement all autonomous cycles of data analysis tasks (ACODATs) in a real scenario to verify their functionalities. Also, it is important to determine the most important knowledge models required in the ACODAT for the definition of the innovation problem. Once determined this, it is necessary to define the relevant everything mining techniques required for their implementations, such as service and process mining tasks. Practical implications ACODAT for the definition of the innovation problem is essential in a process innovation because it allows the organization to identify opportunities for improvement. Originality/value The main contributions of this work are: For an innovation process is specified its ACODATs in order to manage it. A multidimensional data model for the management of an innovation process is defined, which stores the required information of the organization and of the context. The ACODAT for the definition of the innovation problem is detailed and instanced in the textile industry. The Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques required for the ACODAT for the innovation problem definition are specified, in order to obtain the knowledge models (prediction and diagnosis) for the management of the innovation process for MSMEs of the textile 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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Computing and InformaticsSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207