MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494303541 · doi:10.15353/joci.v7i3.2596

Introduction to the Special Issue: Research in Action for Community Informatics: A Matter for Conversation

2011· article· en· W1494303541 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew Allen, Marcus Foth

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationAction (physics)Argument (complex analysis)Action researchComputer scienceProcess (computing)ICTSInformaticsEngineering ethicsSociologyPolitical scienceInformation and Communications TechnologyCommunicationWorld Wide WebEngineeringPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this introduction to the special issue on research in action, we briefly outline an argument concerning the importance of conversation,suggesting that, first, conversational uses of ICTs make them most suitable for community informatic development, and second, that their effective adoption and research requires conversation for that process to be effective.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0100.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.025

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207