MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2406459529 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v5n2p19

Crowdsourcing and Stochastic Modeling

2016· article· en· W2406459529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Srinivas Chakravarthy, Serife Ozkar

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrowdsourcingPopularityContext (archaeology)Data scienceMeaning (existential)Computer scienceInterpretation (philosophy)EpistemologyPsychologyWorld Wide WebGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crowdsourcing has been used in different domains gaining significant exposure in many fields such as healthcare, computer science, environmental sciences, business and marketing. The meaning and interpretation of crowdsourcing is varied and despite its popularity among companies in many sectors it remains little understood. However, the modeling aspects of crowdsourcing in the context of stochastic and algorithmic methods have not been considered until recently. Thus, in this expository paper we intend to provide needed connection between these two areas.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.247 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207