Bibliographic record
Abstract
This presentation focuses on the rural-urban distinction of mobile user information studies. It reports on an exploratory mobile user survey conducted among a relatively understudied population of rural prairie Canadians. The findings indicate a mobile behaviour that deviates from the standard observations reported in the literature gathered from urban areas and those found among many international rural mobile users. The discussion concludes by defining factors that influence future research into rural mobile populations.Cette communication s'intéresse à la distinction rurale-urbaine des études d'utilisateurs de services portables. Sera présentée une étude exploratoire auprès des Canadiens qui utilisent de tels services dans les secteurs ruraux des Prairies, un segment relativement sous-étudié. Les données démontrent un comportement qui se distingue de celui observé dans la littérature parmi les résidents en milieu urbain et de celui d'autres résidents en milieu rural à l'étranger. La discussion conclut le tout en définissant les facteurs qui influenceront les prochaines études sur l'utilisation de services portables chez les populations en milieu rural.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".