MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924680885 · doi:10.15353/joci.v10i3.3440

Rethinking Third Places: Contemporary Design With Technology

2014· article· en· W1924680885 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsAffordanceICTSPoint (geometry)Third orderOrder (exchange)Third worldThird ageSociologyEconomic geographyInformation and Communications TechnologyGeographyComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebHistoryBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oldenburg’s properties of third places were established almost three decades ago. In order to understand if these properties still hold and if and how ICTs changed the concept of third places, we looked at affordances and practices in nine third places in Paris. Our findings point out that most of the properties have changed and also three new ones have emerged mixing the physical and the virtual. We also provide implications for ICTs that aim at stimulating and supporting properties of third places.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.216 · 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