MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408209822 · doi:10.51519/journalisi.v6i4.928

Evolution of AI in Information Systems: A Bibliometric Study

2024· article· en· W4408209822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Afsana Mimi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Systems and Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scienceComputer scienceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant challenges for traditional information systems are posed due to the ever-growing volume and complexity of data. Artificial intelligence has emerged as a powerful solution to address these challenges by adapting and making intelligent decisions. Valuable insights can be gained from data to automate repetitive tasks and optimize the operations. This study examines how the researchers are concentrating to explore multifaceted impact of AI on the design, implementation, and optimization of information systems. AI is transforming the landscape of information systems with progresses in machine learning, text mining, cognitive computing and other AI technologies by enhancing the efficiency and adaptability across various domains. This study delves into this emerging landscape by conducting a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Artificial intelligence in Information systems research. This bibliometric study retrieved a dataset of publications from Scopus database spanning from 1960 to 2023 to find out the insights hidden within the scientific papers. The analysis encompasses key bibliometric indicators, such as citation patterns, co-authorship networks, and thematic clusters etc. to represent historical development of research in Artificial intelligence within the context of Information systems. This study fills a gap in AI and IS literature, drawing on 306 publications, with key contributions from the USA, China, UK, Germany, India and leading authors like OGIELA L (Lidia Ogiela) and CIMINO JJ ( James J. Cimino). Co-authorship networks highlight the dominance of collaborative research hubs in countries like USA, China, Canada, Australia, while citation patterns underscore the influence of seminal works and cross-disciplinary contributions. The findings presented in this paper offer valuable insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking a deeper understanding of the growing AI-IS landscape. As this is the first paper which takes the attempt to conduct a bibliometric analysis on artificial intelligence in information systems, this paper serves as a roadmap for navigating the rich tapestry of research, fostering collaboration, and guiding future investigations in this rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary field.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0260.015
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.041
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information Systems and InformaticsSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207