MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573966720 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2015.465

Knowledge Construction as Movement via Boundary Constructions and Dialogue

2015· article· en· W1573966720 on OpenAlexaff
W. David Holford

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogical selfMovement (music)Possession (linguistics)DialecticEthnographyBoundary (topology)Process (computing)PsychologyCognitive psychologyEpistemologyCognitive scienceSocial psychologyComputer scienceSociologyCommunicationLinguisticsAestheticsMathematicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge construction is described across both verbal and non-verbal interactions between group members observed within an ethnographic case study. Two levels of movements are first observed: one involving the dialogical movement of perspectives between Self and Other, and a second involving non-verbal interactions as a dynamic entanglement of objects and subjects across a process coined as boundary constructions. Both levels are simultaneously involved within the process of knowing. A less visible movement is also present in the form of a dialectical interplay between knowledge possession and knowledge emergence. For such movement to occur social engagement by group participant is vital.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.037
Scholarly communication0.0140.018
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207