MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410705297 · doi:10.29173/cais1902

Information Management Practices and Methodologies in Architecting Information Systems

2025· article· en· W4410705297 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Architecture and Usability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation systemInformation managementComputer scienceManagement information systemsKnowledge managementProcess managementSystems engineeringBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research uses content analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of current trends in Information Architecture (IA) for Information Management (IM). It clarifies the IA concept, its elements, design practices, and methodologies. Additionally, it explores the education, roles, and skillsets expected of information architects in today’s job market. This research can be used to train IA stakeholders, define information architect responsibilities, standardize terminology, and develop best practices and standards for IA design. Ultimately, this work contributes to the evolving field of IA by reducing ambiguity and offering pedagogical insights for Library and Information Studies programs. Pratiques de gestion de l'information et méthodologies dans l'architecture des systèmes d'information RésuméCette recherche utilise l’analyse de contenu pour fournir une vue d’ensemble compréhensible des tendances actuelles en Architecture de l’Information (AI) pour la Gestion de l’Information (GI). Elle clarifie les concepts de l’AI, ses éléments, ses pratiques de conception et ses méthodologies. De plus, elle explore les rôles de l’éducation et les compétences attendues pour les architectes de l’information sur le marché du travail actuel. Cette recherche peut être utilisée pour entraîner les responsables d’AI, définir les responsabilités des architectes de l’information, standardiser la terminologie, et développer les meilleures pratiques et normes pour la conception de l’AI. En définitif, ce travail contribue à l’évolution du domaine de l’AI en réduisant l'ambiguïté et en offrant des perspectives pédagogiques pour les programmes d’études en Bibliothéconomie et Sciences de l’Information. Mots-clésarchitecture de l’information; gestion de l’information; méthodologie en architecture de l'information; pratiques de l’architecture de l’information: architecte de l’information

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.

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)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.031
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · 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