MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413096891 · doi:10.1109/ccict65753.2025.00061

An Appraisal in Internal Control Frameworks Implementation of COSO, ISO 27001 and NIST for Opportunities in Industry 5.0

2025· article· en· W4413096891 on OpenAlexaff
Disha Mittal, Madhavi Damle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNISTControl (management)AccountingComputer scienceBusinessProcess management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry 5.0 represents a paradigm shift in industrial evolution, emphasising human-machine collaboration through sophisticated cognitive systems. This transformation creates new opportunities and challenges for organisations implementing established frameworks like COSO, NIST, and ISO 27001 for compliance, risk management, and governance. While Industry 5.0 builds upon Industry 4.0's foundation, it focuses explicitly on enhancing cognitive capabilities and human-centric approaches. Cognitive technologies enable the automation of complex tasks such as document review, data analysis, and real-time decision support, leading to improved efficiency, cost reduction, and accuracy. However, integrating these technologies presents significant challenges, particularly in data quality management and algorithmic bias mitigation. This study comprehensively analyses internal management practices in Industry 5.0 organisations through a systematic literature review and conceptual analysis. The research examines academic literature on human-machine collaboration performance management and evaluates key frameworks' applicability in this new paradigm. Given the increasing complexity of automation and interconnectivity in modern enterprises, robust internal controls have become critical for organisational success. This paper aims to guide organisations in adopting Industry 5.0 technologies while effectively integrating cognitive systems and human oversight, ultimately achieving enhanced efficiency, personalisation, and sustainability.

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)0.106
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1060.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0200.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207