MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518287630 · doi:10.21432/t2mg6p

Knowledge Society Network: Toward a Dynamic, Sustained Network for Building Knowledge

2010· article· en· W1518287630 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Huang‐Yao Hong, Marlene Scardamalia, Jianwei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSocial network analysisOrganizational network analysisKnowledge managementNetwork analysisSocial network (sociolinguistics)Network societyBody of knowledgeComputer scienceSociologyOrganizational learningEngineeringSocial mediaSocial scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Knowledge Society Network (KSN) “takes advantage of new knowledge media to maximize and democratize society’s knowledge-creating capacity” (www.ikit.org/KSN). This article synthesizes the principles and designs of this network which were initiated over 15 years ago, and presents an exploratory study of interactions in the KSN over four years, elaborating different network structures and the potential of each for knowledge advancement. Four major sub-network structures for participant and idea interaction are described, as reflected in social network analysis of discourse in the KSN. Strengths and weaknesses of work within each sub-network were identified with suggestions for creating a more dynamic, sustained network for knowledge advancement.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.019
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations44
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207