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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we report on our research and design efforts to provide Rwandans with access to and reuse of video interviews discussing the failures and successes of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (UN-ICTR). We describe our general approach and report on three case studies with diverse sectors of Rwandan society: governmental information centres, youth clubs, and a grassroots organization working with victims of sexual violence. Our work includes the development and application of five indicators to assess the success and limitations of our approach: diverse stakeholders; diverse uses; on-going use; cultural, linguistic and geographic reach; and Rwandan initiative. This work makes three important contributions: first, it offers the information field a design approach for use in post-conflict situations; second, it provides near-term evaluation indicators as an initial set others can build from and extend; third, it describes the first empirical explorations of the multi-lifespan information system design research approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it