MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W83518946

Supporting Flexible Business Processes with a Progression Model.

2004· article· en· W83518946 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)Transaction processingTransaction processing systemDatabase transactionOnline transaction processingBusiness processArtifact-centric business process modelDatabaseDistributed transactionWorkflow management systemBusiness process modelingSoftware engineeringBusinessWork in process
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Users require flexibility when interacting with information systems to contend with changing business processes, and to support diverse workflow. Model-based user interface design needs to accommodate flexible business processes by integrating workflow activities with other model approaches. We present a progression model to help in developing systems that support flexible business processes. The progression model tracks a user's interaction when using a transaction-based information system. The steps a user takes to create a transaction and the state of the transaction at each step is made explicit. This provides the user with a mechanism to deal with partial information, interrupted and concurrent transaction entry, and the processing of multiple transactions. The paper describes the progression model along with the potential workflow benefits of recording progressions.

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.

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 score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207