MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084209274 · doi:10.1177/0270467604267299

The Intellectual Assembly Line is Already Here

2004· article· en· W2084209274 on OpenAlexaff
Willem H. Vanderburg

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness process reengineeringParallelsFactory (object-oriented programming)Work (physics)Process (computing)Control (management)Line (geometry)Computer scienceKnowledge managementAssembly lineInformation systemOrganizational structureProcess managementBusinessOperations managementEngineeringManagementMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The universal attempt to link computers by means of business process reengineering, enterprise integration, and the management of technology is creating large systems that structure and control the flows of information within institutions. Human work associated with these systems must be reorganized in the image of these technologies. The transformation of office work now parallels that of factory work as a result of the intellectual assembly line: Each so-called knowledge worker adds and transforms information in a manner almost entirely prescribed by the system, which, in turn, takes this information to the next work station and so on. The result is a loss of control coupled with growing demands and a new kind of organizational structure. It would appear that the implications for human health are possibly even greater than those associated with traditional assembly-line work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2720.145

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207