MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W105103545 · doi:10.15173/mjc.v7i0.252

Editorial: A Reflection on the Role of New Media — From Peer-to-Peer to Protest

2011· editorial· en· W105103545 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christine Larabie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe McMaster Journal of Communication · 2011
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Peer reviewPeer-to-peerPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What does the concept of ‘new’ mean in relation to the technologies that encompass new media? Similar to the path of preceding technologies, new media has permeated many different social, political, and economic realms, transforming the way we carry out daily life. However, the emergence of new media has given rise to a set of assumptions surrounding technological advancement that overlook historical dimensions and ways of thinking about new technology. More specifically, the ‘newness’ of new media carries with it a renewed sense of optimism about technology and its ability to drive social change, revive political landscapes, and foster economic prosperity. One of the aims of this volume is to enlarge this dialogue by further illustrating the depth and scope of issues surrounding new media and the contexts in which new media technologies function.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe McMaster Journal of CommunicationSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207