MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991837421 · doi:10.3390/ijgi3041278

A Systems Perspective on Volunteered Geographic Information

2014· article· en· W1991837421 on OpenAlexafffund
Victoria Fast, Claus Rinner

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVolunteered geographic informationCrowdsourcingPerspective (graphical)Relevance (law)Computer scienceData scienceProduct (mathematics)World Wide WebArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volunteered geographic information (VGI) is geographic information collected by way of crowdsourcing. However, the distinction between VGI as an information product and the processes that create VGI is blurred. Clearly, the environment that influences the creation of VGI is different than the information product itself, yet most literature treats them as one and the same. Thus, this research is motivated by the need to formalize and standardize the systems that support the creation of VGI. To this end, we propose a conceptual framework for VGI systems, the main components of which—project, participants, and technical infrastructure—form an environment conducive to the creation of VGI. Drawing on examples from OpenStreetMap, Ushahidi, and RinkWatch, we illustrate the pragmatic relevance of these components. Applying a system perspective to VGI allows us to better understand the components and functionality needed to effectively create VGI.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.020
Scholarly communication0.0170.018
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207