Search results

The aim of this paper is to explore the possibility of using the Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control (DMAIC) cycle, process mining (PM) and multi-criteria decision methods in an integrated way so that these three elements combined result in a methodology called the Agile DMAIC cycle, which brings more agility and reliability in the execution of the Six Sigma process.

The approach taken by the authors in this study was to analyze the studies arising from this union of concepts and to focus on using PM tools where appropriate to accelerate the DMAIC cycle by improving the first two steps, and to test using the AHP as a decision-making process, to bring more excellent reliability in the definition of indicators.

It was indicated that there was a gain with acquiring indicators and process maps generated by PM. And through the AHP, there was a greater accuracy in determining the importance of the indicators.

Through the results and findings of this study, more organizations can understand the potential of integrating Six Sigma and PM. It was just developed for the first two steps of the DMAIC cycle, and it is also a replicable method for any Six Sigma project where data acquisition through mining is possible.

The authors develop a fully applicable and understandable methodology which can be replicated in other settings and expanded in future research.

Develop a comprehensive framework for assessing the knowledge organization systems (KOSs), including the taxonomy of Wikipedia and the ontologies of Wikidata, with a specific focus on enhancing management and retrieval with a gender nonbinary perspective.

This study employs heuristic and inspection methods to assess Wikipedia’s KOS, ensuring compliance with international standards. It evaluates the efficiency of retrieving non-masculine gender-related articles using the Catalan Wikipedian category scheme, identifying limitations. Additionally, a novel assessment of Wikidata ontologies examines their structure and coverage of gender-related properties, comparing them to Wikipedia’s taxonomy for advantages and enhancements.

This study evaluates Wikipedia’s taxonomy and Wikidata’s ontologies, establishing evaluation criteria for gender-based categorization and exploring their structural effectiveness. The evaluation process suggests that Wikidata ontologies may offer a viable solution to address Wikipedia’s categorization challenges.

The assessment of Wikipedia categories (taxonomy) based on KOS standards leads to the conclusion that there is ample room for improvement, not only in matters concerning gender identity but also in the overall KOS to enhance search and retrieval for users. These findings bear relevance for the design of tools to support information retrieval on knowledge-rich websites, as they assist users in exploring topics and concepts.