MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412469083 · doi:10.18280/mmep.120608

Hybrid Feature-Based Critical Success Factors in Cloud Enterprise Resource Planning Through Artificial Neural Networks and Random Forest

2025· article· en· W4412469083 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jakfat Haekal, Rizaldi Mu’min, Fauzan Fauzan, Abdul Hamid, Didin Sjarifudin, Andi Turseno, Paduloh Paduloh, Andi Adriansyah

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingRandom forestFeature (linguistics)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceResource (disambiguation)Enterprise resource planningKnowledge managementData scienceComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud enterprise resource planning (CERP) systems are widely adopted to enhance operational efficiency.However, in a global context, ERP implementation failure rates remain notably high, ranging from 67% to 90%.If left unaddressed, they will hinder sustainable economic growth and industrial transformation.To address this issue, this study adopts a structured approach by identifying critical success factors (CSFs) based on key performance indicators (KPIs) using the Delphi method and Dempster-Shafer combination method.The resulting dataset integrates multi-stage CSFs and their associated KPI performance and weight values, forming a hybrid feature set that captures interrelated implementation factors.The effectiveness of each implementation stage is assessed through user feedback scores categorized as satisfactory (>4), below satisfactory (3.0-3.9), and failure (<3.0).To evaluate the predictive capability of this hybrid dataset, both artificial neural network (ANN) and random forest (RF) models were applied separately.Each model was trained and tested independently to identify which algorithm achieves higher prediction accuracy for implementation outcomes.The findings indicate that RF significantly outperforms ANN, with an accuracy of 0.849 compared to 0.765.Additionally, confusion matrix, ROC, and AUC analyses further confirm RF's superior predictive capability.Through this research, the identification of CSFs through qualitative analysis or statistical modelling, combined with the integration of machine learning techniques, ultimately improving assessment classification for CERP implementation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207