MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2208023489 · doi:10.22230/src.2015v6n4a216

Mode 2 in Action: Working Across Sectors to Create a Center for Humanities and Technology

2015· article· en· W2208023489 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarly and Research Communication · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite paperDigital humanitiesCenter (category theory)White (mutation)Mode (computer interface)DisciplineAction (physics)Private sectorWork (physics)Knowledge productionPolitical scienceHumanitiesLibrary scienceSociologyPublic relationsKnowledge managementEngineeringComputer scienceSocial scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines recent developments in Amsterdam to establish a Center for Humanities and Technology (CHAT). The project is a collaboration between public research institutions and a private partner. To date, a White Paper has been produced that sets out a shared research agenda addressing both humanities and computing challenges. The article begins with a brief summary of “Mode 2” knowledge production. After providing a fuller description of the White Paper, the extent to which CHAT can be considered an instance of Mode 2 is assessed. Some of the challenges in cross-sector and cross-disciplinary work are presented

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.115 · 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