MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135799206 · doi:10.1145/2049536.2049549

The vlogging phenomena

2011· article· en· W2135799206 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellen S. Hibbard, Deb I. Fels

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMainstreamComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)Sign languageSpace (punctuation)Sign (mathematics)MultimediaWorld Wide WebInternet privacySociologyLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Highly textual websites present barriers to Deaf people, primarily using American Sign Language for communication. Deaf people have been posting ASL content in form of vlogs to YouTube and specialized websites such as Deafvideo.TV. This paper presents some of the first insights into the use of vlogging technology and techniques among the Deaf community. The findings suggest that there are differences between YouTube and Deafvideo.TV due to differences between mainstream and specialized sites. Vlogging technology seems to influence use of styles that are not found or are used differently in face-to-face communications. Examples include the alteration of vloggers' signing space to convey different meanings on screen.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.212 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207