MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030800675 · doi:10.1145/1942800.1942802

Interview with Peter King

2011· article· en· W2030800675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claus Atzenbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGWEB Newsletter · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypertextAccreditationComputer scienceLibrary scienceWork (physics)PublishingRotation formalisms in three dimensionsWorld Wide WebManagementPolitical scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dr. Peter King has been active in digital documents and hypertext for almost thirty years. He was one of the founders of the Electronic Publishing conference series and of the ACM Symposium on Document Engineering, whose Steering Committee he now chairs. He holds the position of Professor Emeritus of Computer Science at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. He has recently held research positions at the University of Kent, UK and at LIRMM, Montpellier, France, and has worked at several other European and Canadian research institutes. Peter's work in document engineering covers several areas. He has performed individual and collaborative work on formalisms for multimedia document specification and on document description languages and systems, leading to the creation of several working systems. He has collaborated on work on hypertext, including the OPALES system and its successors, and on hypertext architectures supporting collaborative document usage and user communities. His joint work with Marc and Jocelyne Nanard won the ACM Engelbart award for best paper at the Hypertext 2003 Conference. Prior to developing his interest in document engineering and hypertext, he worked extensively in the area of programming language design and implementation. Peter King is a leader in computing education and educational standards. He is Director of Accreditation for CIPS, the Canadian Information Processing Society, which establishes and assesses industry recognized standards for postsecondary computing education in university and college institutions across Canada and internationally.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0090.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.014

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.084 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGWEB NewsletterSame topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207