Enhancing the Social and Cognitive Benefits of Digital Tools and Media
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While new media have greatly magnified people's opportunities for access to and sharing of knowledge and ideas and for forming social networks they have not performed so well as media for the collaborative production of new knowledge. In this symposium, researchers with experience in efforts to advance knowledge building apply insights they have gained to the question of how to enhance the socio-cognitive benefits of new media. We suggest development of a technological, social, cognitive and epistemic infrastructure for creative knowledge work. Toward this end we propose engaging teachers in design research along with researchers and subject-matter experts, enhancing students' ways of contributing to the pursuit of causal explanations, and introducing technological advances that provide greater support for high-level knowledge processes. We argue that teachers and students must be major players in the design and working of an infrastructure for creative knowledge work.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it