MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2391761845

ASIST&T SIG CR Doctoral Research Forum Title: A Review of Boundary Objects in Classification Research

2013· review· en· W2391761845 on OpenAlexaff
Eva Hourihan Jansen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassification schemeSituatedBoundary (topology)Empirical researchEpistemologyData scienceSociologyBiological classificationComputer scienceKnowledge managementArtificial intelligenceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – To extend our understanding of conceptual frameworks and epistemological assumptions in classification research. I survey recent reviews and empirical inquiry that features the concept of boundary objects, and discuss their implications for classification research. Further, I discuss the problems posed when predominant discourses concerning classification research inhibit gaining an understanding of classification practices as socially, historically and culturally constructed. I propose a line of inquiry into classification practices in large scale infrastructure that considers locating and describing the particular, situated, socio-material relationships where a standard classification is used in practice.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.595
GPT teacher head0.619
Teacher spread0.023 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207