MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540717760 · doi:10.15353/joci.v11i2.2833

Deep Trust in the future of Community Informatics

2015· article· en· W1540717760 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

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismParticipatory designSociologyInformaticsEthnographyProcess (computing)Public relationsField (mathematics)Community-based participatory researchCommunity engagementKnowledge managementPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engaging in community-based ICT projects, whether for research, design, or implementation purposes, often requires a long-term engagement among practitioners, researchers and community members. In this paper, we discuss how these projects are fundamentally shaped and reshaped by the trust building process, through which 'relations' with a community become deeper 'relationships'. The discussion is based on our experiences in two separated field sites: a Seniors Community Center in Northern Italy, where we established a 3-years long participatory research and design project; and an 8-month ethnography of Community Technology Centers in three marginalized favelas of Vitória, Brazil, where we have explored ICT use by local residents. We identify the difficult challenges in the process of developing trust relationships, commonalities between the two different contexts, and discuss the role of “deep trust” relationships in the future of CI.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0120.002
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.230 · 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