MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161002879 · doi:10.1177/1090198108320357

Emergence and Robustness of a Community Discussion Network on Mercury Contamination and Health in the Brazilian Amazon

2006· article· en· W2161002879 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Mertens, Johanne Saint-Charles, Marc Lucotte, Donna Mergler

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education & Behavior · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Amazon rainforestSustainabilityCommunity resilienceCommunity networkIntermediaryComputer scienceSociologyEnvironmental healthComputer securityBusinessRedundancy (engineering)MedicineEcologyWorld Wide WebMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.335 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education & BehaviorSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207