MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077570964 · doi:10.1145/2024288.2024295

Constructing expert profiles over time for skills management and expert finding

2011· article· en· W2077570964 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExpert finding and Q&A systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfiling (computer programming)Computer scienceKnowledge managementRecommender systemIdentification (biology)Expert systemData scienceWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expert profiling and identification are important to both knowledge workers and organizations. To this end, skills management and expert recommender systems facilitate the management of skills and competencies and help find appropriate experts to meet a particular need. In this paper, we present a technique for generating evolving expert profiles of individuals composed of their skills and competencies using heterogeneous data from divergent sources of information. We use self-declarations, completed learning activities, and previous work experience to generate the initial profile. Recommendations, "wisdom of the crowd"", direct observations of online and offline activities, and content generated by the individual both within the organization and on the Web are then used to enrich the profiles and to assess and validate skills and competencies over time.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicExpert finding and Q&A systemsFrench-language works237,207