MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparative Review of Handheld Devices Internet Connectivity Revenue Models to Support Mobile Learning

2010· review· en· W2484812516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Phillip Olla

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile deviceBroadbandMobile broadbandRevenueComputer scienceTelecommunicationsThe InternetMobile paymentMobile technologyMobile computingBusinessWorld Wide WebWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides a survey of mobile broadband revenue models deployed by mobile network operators in the UK, USA and Canada. The survey of exiting revenue models highlights the technology adoption trends for handheld devices by consumers and identifies the future impact of these trends on the network operators and content providers with respect to educational content. This article focuses on innovations in consumer propositions that can support the Mobile Learning phenomenon. The study reveals that the various operators aim to differentiate their consumer propositions by branding, technology devices, and flexible pricing structures. From the results of the study it is clear that the current continuous convergence of multimedia applications, information services, digital networks, and devices will likely lead to an increase in adoption of Mobile learning systems in the UK, Canada and the USA especially as the price per bandwidth drops and new innovative connectivity options are deployed such as built in mobile broadband processor in laptops and consumer devices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207