IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/vyid10.1007_s10796-016-9630-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical assessment of the accuracy of an interoperability prediction language

Author

Listed:
  • Johan Ullberg

    (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)

  • Pontus Johnson

    (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Interoperability, defined as the satisfaction of a communication need between two or more actors, is an important aspect in many phases of an enterprise’s development. Mastering the field of interoperability is a daunting task so aid in predicting interoperability can be of great benefit. Formalisms capable of such predictions of future information system architectures are however sparse, and when employed, it is essential that the prediction is accurate. In this paper, a previously proposed interoperability modelling and prediction language is subjected to case testing and evaluated toward interoperability predictions made by practitioners and experts in the field. The results show that although there are some areas not currently covered by the framework, in general, it performs better than the intended users, and would thereby provide additional support in various development and design contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Johan Ullberg & Pontus Johnson, 0. "Empirical assessment of the accuracy of an interoperability prediction language," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v::y::i::d:10.1007_s10796-016-9630-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-016-9630-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-016-9630-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-016-9630-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan M. Alberola & Vicent Botti & Jose M. Such, 2014. "Advances in infrastructures and tools for multiagent systems," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 163-167, April.
    2. Matthieu Lauras & Frédérick Benaben & Sébastien Truptil & Aurélie Charles, 2015. "Event-cloud platform to support decision-making in emergency management," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 857-869, August.
    3. Mary Kynn, 2008. "The ‘heuristics and biases’ bias in expert elicitation," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(1), pages 239-264, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johan Ullberg & Pontus Johnson, 2017. "Empirical assessment of the accuracy of an interoperability prediction language," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 819-833, August.
    2. John Oredo & Denis Dennehy, 2023. "Exploring the Role of Organizational Mindfulness on Cloud Computing and Firm Performance: The Case of Kenyan Organizations," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 2029-2050, October.
    3. Zhiwei Shen & Martin Odening & Ostap Okhrin, 2016. "Can expert knowledge compensate for data scarcity in crop insurance pricing?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(2), pages 237-269.
    4. Yanxin Wang & Jian Li & Xi Zhao & Gengzhong Feng & Xin (Robert) Luo, 2020. "Using Mobile Phone Data for Emergency Management: a Systematic Literature Review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    5. Fredrik Carlsson & Dinky Daruvala & Henrik Jaldell, 2012. "Do administrators have the same priorities for risk reductions as the general public?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 79-95, August.
    6. Flandoli, F. & Giorgi, E. & Aspinall, W.P. & Neri, A., 2011. "Comparison of a new expert elicitation model with the Classical Model, equal weights and single experts, using a cross-validation technique," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(10), pages 1292-1310.
    7. Hosack, Geoffrey R. & Hayes, Keith R. & Barry, Simon C., 2017. "Prior elicitation for Bayesian generalised linear models with application to risk control option assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 351-361.
    8. Brito, Mario & Griffiths, Gwyn, 2016. "A Bayesian approach for predicting risk of autonomous underwater vehicle loss during their missions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 55-67.
    9. Berrang-Ford, Lea & Garton, Kelly, 2013. "Expert knowledge sourcing for public health surveillance: National tsetse mapping in Uganda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 246-255.
    10. Mkrtchyan, L. & Podofillini, L. & Dang, V.N., 2015. "Bayesian belief networks for human reliability analysis: A review of applications and gaps," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1-16.
    11. Roopesh Ranjan & Tilmann Gneiting, 2010. "Combining probability forecasts," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 72(1), pages 71-91, January.
    12. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    13. Mariachiara Piraina & Paolo Trucco, 2022. "Emergency management capabilities of interdependent systems: framework for analysis," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 149-176, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v::y::i::d:10.1007_s10796-016-9630-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.