MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157007647 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2008v33n2a1950

Online Publishing, Technical Representation, and the Politics of Code: The Case of <i>CJC Online</i>

2008· article· en· W2157007647 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingCommodificationAgency (philosophy)ScholarshipPoliticsPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceInterdependenceCitizenshipElectronic publishingRepresentation (politics)Media studiesSocial scienceWorld Wide WebThe InternetLawComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Journal of Communication ( CJC) began to experiment with online technologies in 1994, in part as a response to the increasing commodification of scholarship by commercial academic publishers. This article reviews and reflects on the CJC’s online publishing efforts over the past decade and suggests that online publishing technology is a site of struggle that is situated by and situates academics, publishers, and readers along interdependent axes of agency, citizenship, and commodification. Today, the CJC uses and contributes to the Open Journal Systems (OJS) publishing technology developed by the Public Knowledge Project. We argue that academic-initiated undertakings such as OJS and the Canada-wide Synergies project present academics with strategic opportunities to define and control online scholarly publishing.

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)0.002
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 score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.254 · 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