MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W150761983

Genres of search: A concept for understanding successive search behaviour

2009· article· en· W150761983 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leanne Bowler

Bibliographic record

VenueD-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of OxfordMcGill University
KeywordsProcess (computing)PhenomenonComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Information retrievalInformation seekingNaturalismExploratory searchFormal concept analysisEpistemologyHistoryAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents Genres of Search, a concept that contributes to our understanding of the successive search phenomenon. The concept is explained in the context of a case study that used naturalistic methods to explore the information-seeking behaviour of 10 participants, aged 16 to 18, as they searched for, selected, and used information for a school-based inquiry project on a topic related to the history of Western civilization. The study found an array of sub-searches, or Genres of Search, embedded within the information problem solving process, each genre representing a distinct information need. The Genres of Search concept is useful for mapping irregularities in successive searching and provides insight into the nature of the tasks involved in the search process.

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)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.014
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueD-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh)Same topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207