MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010845851 · doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00309

Physical Place and Cyberplace: The Rise of Personalized Networking

2001· article· fr· W2010845851 on OpenAlexaff
Barry Wellman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSoftware portabilitySociologyPersonalizationWorld Wide WebArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer networks are social networks. Social affordances of computer‐supported social networks – broader bandwidth, wireless portability, globalized connectivity, personalization – are fostering the movement from door‐to‐door and place‐to‐place communities to person‐to‐person and role‐to‐role communities. People connect in social networks rather than in communal groups. In‐person and computer‐mediated communication are integrated in communities characterized by personalized networking. Les réseaux informatiques sont des réseaux sociaux. Les possibilités sociales qu’offrent les réseaux sociaux informatisés – bande passante plus large, portabilité sans fil, connectivité mondiale, personnalisation – sont en train de favoriser le passage de communautés de porte‐à‐porte et de lieu‐à‐lieu vers des communautés d’individu‐à‐individu et de rôle‐à‐rôle. Ainsi, les gens se lient davantage dans des réseaux sociaux que dans des collectivités. Les communications directes et via l’informatique sont intégrées dans des communautés caractérisées par un maillage personnalisé.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0120.020
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1,480
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional ResearchSame topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207