Modeling the Transformation of Configuration Management Processes in a Multi-Project Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human resource management during project implementation in a multi-project environment requires addressing the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Agile methodologies allow for greater management flexibility, necessitating an agile transformation of human resource management processes. Changes occurring in human resource management lead to modifications in the initial project team and alterations in the state of the resource pool in a multi-project environment. To ensure controllable changes in the project team and address the task of allocating (reallocating) limited resources among project tasks in a multi-project environment with subsequent optimization based on a selected criterion, it is proposed to use configuration management of human resources. Depending on the chosen level of detail, project specifics, and the implementation environment, configuration elements can be an executor, project team, or intact team. Types of equivalence applied to the set of configuration elements have been classified. A model of the configuration management process for human resources has been considered. Using the proposed model will allow for formalizing the process of implementing human resource configuration management in a multi-project environment. Constructive enumeration of configuration elements in a multi-project environment has been examined. Identifying a typical representative of the configuration and considering the given equivalence, followed by selecting a resource allocation/reallocation option that meets the specified constraints, enhances team adaptability. An example of configuration management in addressing team composition management tasks has been discussed. The proposed approach can be applied in managing human resources for agile transformation projects of critical infrastructure, particularly in the healthcare sector, during the establishment of hospital clusters and supercluster medical institutions. This is because implementing such projects necessitates continuous monitoring of changes and requirements for resource provisioning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".