Emergence and Robustness of a Community Discussion Network on Mercury Contamination and Health in the Brazilian Amazon
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
Information exchanges, debates, and negotiations through community social networks are essential to ensure the sustainability of the development process initiated in participatory research. The authors analyze the structural properties and robustness of a discussion network about mercury issues in a community in the Brazilian Amazon involved in a participatory research aimed at reducing exposure to the pollutant. Most of the villagers are connected in a large network and are separated from other individuals by few intermediaries. The structure of the discussion network displays resilience to the random elimination of villagers but shows vulnerability to the removal of one villager who has been a long-term collaborator of the project. Although the network exhibits a structure likely to favor an efficient flow of information, results show that specific actions should be taken to stimulate the emergence of a pool of opinion leaders and increase the redundancy of discussion channels.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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