MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Framework for Analyzing Social Interaction Using Broadband Visual Communication Technologies

2010· book-chapter· en· W2478261807 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityBroadbandMultidisciplinary approachComputer scienceVideoconferencingKnowledge managementMultimediaTelecommunicationsHuman–computer interactionSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Broadband visual communication (BVC) technologies— such as videoconferencing and video sharing—allow for the exchange of rich simultaneous or pre-recorded visual and audio data over broadband networks. This chapter introduces an analytical framework that can be utilized by multidisciplinary teams working with BVC technologies to analyze the variables that hinder people’s adoption and use of BVC. The framework identifies four main categories, each with a number of sub-categories, covering variables that are social and technical in nature: namely, the production and reception of audio-visual content, technical infrastructure, interaction of users and groups with the technical infrastructure, and social and organizational relations. The authors apply the proposed framework to a study of BVC technology usability and effectiveness as well as technology needs assessment in remote and rural First Nation (indigenous) communities of Canada.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.297 · 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