Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Although Living Labs have emerged as resilient research and innovation infrastructures and have been shown to be a “key” to the integration of research and innovation processes in real-life settings, they still fail to provide and function according to unified and harmonized processes that are easily accessible and exploitable by academic and industry researchers. Towards this end, VITALISE aims to create the first Harmonization guidelines for Living Labs that will facilitate the access of researchers to the provided infrastructures. This document presents the work performed for the Harmonization of the way Living Labs work for the fifth semester of VITALISE. Within the VITALISE project, various Harmonization activities were carried out with consortium partners and external stakeholders, to develop the Standard v0.5, building on the work done for the earlier versions of the Standard (v0.1, v0.2, v0.3 and v0.4). The first version of the Standard (v0.1) provided an overview of the state-of-the-art information about Living Labs in the VITALISE consortium and served as the foundational deliverable for the VITALISE Standards. The second version of the Standard (v0.2) introduced the process of developing and disseminating a Wiki page that incorporated v0.1 and updated the parts of the Standard that described the data and technologies used in living labs, using a Delphi study method, and collected the initial set of terms for the living lab lexicon. Additionally, during the second semester, the Harmonization Board was established, and a meeting with the Harmonization Body was held. In the third version of the Standard (v0.3) the device and technology taxonomy were updated through a Delphi study, several meetings were held for updating the services and procedures categorization, as well as several activities and sessions for collecting and achieving a preliminary agreement on living lab lexicon terms. Moreover, two templates were developed for the co-creation sessions conducted within the Joint Research Activities (JRAs) and also, during this third semester, the project held its second plenary meeting in Helsinki and the second Harmonization Body meeting. For the fourth version of the Standard (v0.4) a wide range of actions took place, including meetings and activities to update the Living Lab Lexicon terms and LL services, as well as define the Living Lab Innovation and Research phases. In addition, an analysis of the Open Call data was conducted related to stakeholders, services, and devices and some interviews with partners from the consortium and beyond. Furthermore, the finalization and approval of data and devices taxonomy from the Delphi study occurred, alongside the occurrence of the 3rd Harmonization Body meeting and one Harmonization Board meeting in January and February, respectively. In this iteration for the current deliverable (Standard Version 0.5), a series of actions unfolded, commencing with meetings and activities aimed at refining and validating the Research and Innovation process and create a visual tool for the representation of the process. Progress was achieved in the validation of the general KPI table and the proposal of a preliminary set of questions for the self-assessment tool for living labs. Substantial advancements were made in the realm of methods and tools, including a preliminary categorization of the questionnaires and instruments utilized in the JRA pilots. Additionally, some ethics tools, along with templates for Data Controllers Agreements have been specified and presented in this deliverable. Lastly, the 4th and 5th Harmonization Body meetings were held, alongside a dedicated session in Open Living Lab Days 2023, focusing on the VITALISE Harmonization journey. The final Section of this document presents the Standard v0.5 that will be also published in the living lab harmonization wiki page.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,029 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».