MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093775807 · doi:10.1145/1940761.1940836

Notes toward a politics of personalization

2011· article· en· W2093775807 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 2011 iConference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPersonalizationRecommender systemWorld Wide WebDomain (mathematical analysis)Computer scienceResource (disambiguation)Control (management)Knowledge managementPoliticsWeb 2.0Internet privacyThe InternetPolitical scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recommender system is an information organization tool which extracts knowledge of individual users of a specific (online) resource based on their activity within that domain, and uses this knowledge to generate for them individual recommendations. These recommendations are made based on the broad assumption that people who have agreed on some things in the past will likely agree on things in the future. [1] Because these systems classify content based on how it is engaged with by previous users, they have emerged as an effective (and profitable) way to organize content on the web, the web itself being resistant, almost by its very nature, to the imposition of top-down, ontological classificatory control. [2]

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.170 · 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