MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397537155 · doi:10.1145/2897659.2897663

Measuring user influence in GitHub

2016· article· en· W2397537155 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsCentralityComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Data scienceSocial network (sociolinguistics)SoftwareWorld Wide WebAbundance (ecology)Social influenceSocial mediaPsychologyArtificial intelligenceSocial psychologyStatisticsEcologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Influence in social networks has been extensively studied for collaborative-filtering recommendations and marketing purposes. We are interested in the notion of influence in Software Social Networks (SSNs); more specifically, we want to answer the following questions: 1) What does "influence" mean in SSNs? Given the variety of types of interactions supported in these networks and the abundance of centrality-type metrics, what is the nature of the influence captured by these matrics? 2) Are there silos of influence in these platforms or does influence span across thematic boundaries?

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOpen Source Software InnovationsFrench-language works237,207