MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389445798 · doi:10.53759/9852/jrs202301002

The Development of a Design Theory for Web Based Information Systems

2023· article· en· W4389445798 on OpenAlexaff
Jain Emadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Robotics Spectrum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBlueprintInformation systemNoveltyThe InternetKnowledge managementData scienceManagement scienceWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a common assumption among individuals that the complexity involved in developing novel systems utilizing Web technologies implies that Information Systems (IS) that are Web-based must possess fundamental and significant distinctions from conventional IS. This study raises skepticism regarding the veracity of this claim. The literature pertaining to academic research, manuals, and sales material frequently espouses optimistic claims regarding the capabilities of e-commerce and e-business technologies and applications, often grounded in the assumption of novelty associated with the Internet. The objective of the research is to establish a systematic classification system for information systems theory based on its efficacy in addressing four fundamental objectives: analysis, explanation, prescription, and prediction. This study utilized both experimental and descriptive qualitative methodologies. Subsequent to the analysis phase in the system development cycle of information technology, the design phase ensues. The results indicate that the evolution of an information technology system can be delineated by its phases of requirement specification, design planning, and execution. The manifestation of this phenomenon is observed through the development of a strategic blueprint, the production of a visual representation or draft, or the organization of multiple components into a functional entirety. In conclusion, it is imperative for information systems to give priority to both the user and the integration of the system.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.013
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations82
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Robotics SpectrumSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207