MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512258322 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.139

100 Collaborative Products and their Uses

2003· article· en· W1512258322 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jon Baggaley, Jim Depow, Jim Klaas, Norine Wark

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report highlights trends that have emerged from the evaluation of 100 online collaborative tools in this series of reports so far . Emphasis is placed upon the special requirements of distance education (DE) users of collaborative tools, in the selection of online text/ audio/ video-conferencing, polling and whiteboard methods, and integrated course delivery systems combining all of these features. The technical and didactic skills for using collaborative tools effectively are illustrated in relation to a standard freeware for online audio-conferencing.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOpen Source Software InnovationsFrench-language works237,207