MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982267418

IDENTIFYING SITUATIONAL FACTORS FOR IS\nDEVELOPMENT PROCESSES: APPLYING THE\nMETHOD-IN-ACTION FRAMEWORK

2002· article· en· W6982267418 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
FundersStiftelsen för Kunskaps- och Kompetensutveckling
KeywordsSituational ethicsOrder (exchange)Information systemSituation awarenessSituation analysisMethod engineeringSubject (documents)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are a large number of Information Systems Engineering methods available.The aim of these methods is to support the development process.In doing so, they become subject to the forces, which have an impact on the development process.The paper applies the method-in-action framework on four different cases in order to describe the adaptations, which are made when utilising a method.The situational factors and methodological issues identified in this project show that the method-in-action framework may be used in order to extend the area of use for situational factors.We have also identified some factors, which supplement the characteristics of the sets of factors in the method-in-action framework.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207