MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022586113 · doi:10.1145/2311917.2311921

Design of communication

2012· article· en· W2022586113 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos J. Costa, Manuela Aparício, Andrew Simoes Braga

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachCommunication theoryContext (archaeology)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceManagement scienceEngineeringSociologyMathematicsSocial scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design of communication is a multidisciplinary field. Several theories have been proposed in the context of different fields - from philosophy, mathematics, and physics to literature, economics and psychology. Those theories may support the design of communication. The purpose of this paper is to identify the main communication theories, and to analyze which of them have been employed in the context of design of communication. The main purpose of the framework presented in this paper is to group communication theories into three theoretical perspectives. Several other theories are also presented, illustrating their applicability in the field of the design of communication, which appeared in some of the research papers presented at the SIGDOC conferences and workshops.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.344
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207