MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099040923 · doi:10.1068/b35026

Blog Links as Pipelines to Buzz Elsewhere: The Case of New York Theater Blogs

2009· article· en· W2099040923 on OpenAlex
Brant W Jones, Ben Spigel, Edward J. Malecki

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

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and Design · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd
KeywordsMarketing buzzField (mathematics)Face (sociological concept)Focus (optics)Media studiesAdvertisingSociologyWorld Wide WebComputer scienceBusinessSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of buzz is both new and heavily contested. One of the strongest debates about buzz is the possibility of ‘virtual buzz’ or buzz that takes place online. At the heart of this debate is the importance of real-time, face-to-face contact. To investigate virtual buzz we present a study of a network of weblogs, or blogs, which share a topical focus on the New York City theater scene. Using social network analysis we find that these blogs exhibit a dense network of interlinkages between each other, with no dominant blog controlling the discourse. We believe this to be indicative of a buzz-like environment. We conclude by discussing the advantages that the study of blogs has for the field of economic geography.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.252 · 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