MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7045390495

Business Process Preservation: How to capture, document & evaluate?: Poster - iPRES 2012 - Digital Curation Institute, iSchool, Toronto

2012· article· en· W7045390495 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhaidra (Universität Wien) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersÖsterreichische Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft
KeywordsBusiness processUnavailabilityProcess (computing)Digital preservationBusiness process modelingInterdependencePlan (archaeology)Business rule
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preserved digital data is often of limited use and value, due to the unavailability of the environment where the data has been generated, executed, analysed, and presented.The preservation of complete processes, including the supporting infrastructure, raises a number of new challenges.In highly computerized firms, processes are often based on service oriented architectures with services provided by third parties.Digital preservation of business processes requires keeping the data, software services and infrastructure available for long time spans.The strong intra-and interdependencies of components make modification and adoption for preservation highly complex.Besides the technical challenges, the organisation and legal aspects of a process need to be considered as well.Contracts for external services, licences for software, access rights to business data and national data regulations for sensible data have to be taken into account when preserving complex information systems.The TIMBUS project targets the research and development of methods and tools for preserving business processes over time.This poster presents a phased phases approach and the processes to capture and identify the relevant context, plan preservation actions and execute and store business process for the future.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.013

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhaidra (Universität Wien)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207