MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296467906 · doi:10.16995/dscn.26

From <em>Taste of Home to Bullipedia</em>: collaboration, motivations and trust

2016· article· en· W2296467906 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Studies / Le champ numérique · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineEncyclopediaClass (philosophy)TasteWorld Wide WebOrder (exchange)Computer scienceSocial mediaSocial network (sociolinguistics)Internet privacyAdvertisingSociologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceLibrary scienceMathematicsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p id="d1e56"><em id="d1e57" class="term">Bullipedia</em>, the online gastronomic encyclopedia, is an idea yet to be developed. In this work, we analyze a community formed around a food magazine, <em id="d1e60" class="titlej">Taste of Home</em> (ToH), and extract some good practices to incorporate them to the future <em id="d1e63" class="term">Bullipedia</em>. <p id="d1e66"> ToH is a recipe exchange magazine specialized in Midwestern cuisine. Its recipes are reliable as they are from home cooks and tested by ToH's professional chefs. This model of user created content (curated by culinary experts) generates trust and a strong sense of community among like-minded people who share food preparation tips and anecdotes. In this paper, we present a study on <strong id="d1e68" class="bold">the interaction network of ToH community</strong> in order to understand major motivators for its members to contribute. <p id="d1e71"> In our approach, we analyzed the ToH community through its social network on Facebook. Firstly, we selected a subset of users that posted on ToH's timeline. Then, we created connections between two users when one of them commented on the other's post. Finally, we extracted the topology of the social network and identified the main nodes. Our key finding is that this community is very poorly structured and hierarchical, and that ToH is placed in a central position, which gives it full control of all flow of information in the network. <p id="d1e73"> The fact above is important for a magazine whose business model is based on advertising, as it ensures its users always have to visit its own sources of information. We propose to adopt such demonstrated successful model to the <em id="d1e75" class="term">Bullipedia</em>. <p id="d1e78"><em class="term"><br /></em> <em id="d1e79" class="term">Bullipedia</em>, l'encyclopédie gastronomique en ligne, est une idée qui reste encore à développer. Dans cet article, nous avons analysé une collectivité qui s'est formée autour d'une revue culinaire, <em id="d1e82" class="titlej">Taste of Home</em> (ToH), et en avons extrait quelques bonnes pratiques afin de les incorporer à la future <em id="d1e85" class="term">Bullipedia</em>. <p id="d1e88"> ToH est une revue d'échange de recettes spécialisée dans la cuisine du Midwest. Ses recettes sont dignes de confiance car elles proviennent de cuisiniers et cuisinières maison et ont été testées par les chefs professionnels de ToH. Ce modèle de contenu créé par l'utilisateur (et organisé par des experts culinaires) inspire la confiance ainsi qu'un solide sentiment de communauté parmi des personnes qui ont les mêmes aspirations et qui partagent des conseils et des anecdotes sur la préparation des repas. Dans ce document, nous présentons une étude sur le <strong id="d1e90" class="bold">réseau d'interaction de la collectivité ToH</strong> afin de comprendre les principaux motivateurs de contribution de ses membres. <p id="d1e93"> Dans notre approche, nous avons analysé la collectivité ToH par l'entremise de son réseau social dans Facebook. D'abord, nous avons choisi un sous-ensemble d'utilisateurs qui ont affiché sur la page de ToH. Ensuite, nous avons créé des liaisons entre deux utilisateurs lorsque l'un a commenté l'affichage de l'autre. Enfin, nous avons extrait la topologie du réseau social et avons identifié les principaux nodules. Selon nos principales constatations, cette collectivité manque totalement de structure et est très hiérarchisée, et ToH se trouve dans une position centrale, ce qui lui donne le plein contrôle du flux des informations du réseau. Le fait ci-dessus est important pour une revue dont le modèle d'entreprise est fondé sur la publicité, car cela garantit que ses utilisateurs doivent toujours visiter ses propres sources d'information. Nous proposons d'adopter un tel modèle de réussite éprouvé pour <em id="d1e95" class="term">Bullipedia</em>.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.231 · 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