MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1508119335 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2004v29n3a1424

E-publishing in Developing Economies

2004· article· en· W1508119335 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingIndigenousElectronic publishingVisibilityDeveloping countryPolitical scienceQuality (philosophy)Public relationsLibrary scienceBusinessWorld Wide WebComputer scienceThe InternetEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electronic publishing has been heralded as a worldwide solution to information dissemination. This article considers the current problems experienced by traditional journals published in the developing world, with particular reference to publishing in sub-Saharan Africa. The opportunities offered by electronic online publishing are discussed to determine how they can resolve the current problems in dissemination and improve quality. Two case studies of different initiatives are presented: an online-only journal, the African Journal of Biotechnology (AJB), and an online journal abstracting service, African Journals OnLine (AJOL). The article concludes that although online publishing is not a solution for all the problems experienced by journals in developing countries, it offers great potential for increasing the visibility and quality of indigenous knowledge within the global research community.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.205 · 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