MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414061360 · doi:10.64803/jocsaic.v1i2.19

Visualization and Analysis of Employee Performance Data Using a Power BI-based Business Intelligence Dashboard

2024· article· en· W4414061360 on OpenAlexaff
Imeldawaty Gultom, Eka Pandu Cynthia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Science Artificial Intelligence and Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDashboardBusiness intelligenceVisualizationData visualizationPerformance managementProductivityPerformance indicatorKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current digital and competitive era, the utilization of Business Intelligence (BI) technology has become crucial in supporting data-driven decision-making. This research aims to develop and analyze a Power BI-based Business Intelligence dashboard focused on visualizing employee performance. This study was conducted by collecting performance data from the Human Resource Information System (HRIS), which was then processed and visualized in the form of key metrics such as attendance rates, individual target achievements, productivity per division, and periodic performance evaluations. Power BI was chosen for its ability to integrate various data sources and present interactive visualizations that are easy for management to understand. The methodology used involves the ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) process, data model design, and the development of visual reports that support descriptive and comparative analysis. The results of this study indicate that the use of BI dashboards significantly helps the company in monitoring employee performance in real-time, identifying trends in productivity decline, and designing data-driven improvement strategies. In addition, this dashboard also serves as an effective communication tool between management and the HR division. Thus, the use of Power BI as a tool for visualization and performance analysis adds significant value to the strategic and data-driven management of human resources

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 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 Computer Science Artificial Intelligence and CommunicationsSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207