MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330918698 · doi:10.1075/idj.9.2-3.03fra

Information design and cultural difference

2000· article· en· W2330918698 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Design Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Architecture and Usability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionGlobalizationPresentation (obstetrics)Cognitive scienceSociologyComputer scienceInformation designEpistemologyKnowledge managementArtificial intelligencePsychologyHuman–computer interactionPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information design has traditionally attempted to develop its methods by creating logical sequences and structures to organize both the content and visual presentation of information. Creating clusters, categories, sequences and hierarchies, designers have achieved highly efficient ways of presenting complex information. The modernistic belief in universal s is today reinforced by notions of globalization fostered by end of the century capitalism. Nevertheless, it is increasingly evident that cognitive styles vary from people to people, and that human cognitive performance does not follow artificial intelligence models, but operates according to complex routines that are based on factors which are affected by individual and cultural make up. This article intends to articulate some of those factors, and some of the implications that their existence poses for design practice and education.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.017
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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