MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122284388 · doi:10.1446/20542

Ha ancora senso l'intervento pubblico nella televisione?

2005· article· it· W2122284388 on OpenAlex
Giuseppe Richeri

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomia della Cultura · 2005
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse academic and cultural studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic broadcastingBroadcasting (networking)State (computer science)Intervention (counseling)Political scienceService (business)Media studiesPublic serviceAdvertisingSociologyBusinessPublic administrationMarketingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the synthesis of Giuseppe Richeri's Introductory Report to thediscussion of the international panel of researchers gathered at Mc Gill University, Montreal Canada, in January 2005. The crisis of the historical motives of state intervention in broadcasting is pointed out as well as the fading of those motives in the programme supply of public service broadcasters increasingly commercialised. Meanwhile, the analysis of economic and cultural trends in the affluent multichannel television systems highlights the survival of old and the birth of new reasons of public consideration and policies in broadcasting. The paper ends considering the forms of a public initiative aiming some social and cultural interests of the viewers, in a television system totally market oriented.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.052

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.191 · 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