MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510257247 · doi:10.1590/1981-5344/2671

Desenhando informação na sala de aula: a participação brasileira na coleta de dados do projeto internacional iSquare

2016· article· pt· W2510257247 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lucas Almeida Serafim, Adriana Carla Silva de Oliveira, Jenna Hartel, Gustavo Henrique de Araújo Freire, Guilherme Ataíde Dias

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectivas em Ciência da Informação · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo Este artigo apresenta a participação de acadêmicos brasileiros da fase de coleta de dados do projeto de pesquisa internacional e colaborativo iSquare, sediado na Universidade de Toronto, Canadá. As origens e fundamentos teóricos do estudo são discutidos com doze países que investigaram as concepções visuais de informação de estudantes de pós-graduação, utilizando a técnica de pesquisa “desenhe e escreva” (draw-and-write). Este artigo representa uma inovação metodológica pelo uso de métodos visuais de arte-informada (arts-informed), os quais são raros na Ciência da Informação. A equipe do Brasil descobriu fatores socioculturais que influenciam as concepções visuais de informação dos estudantes, e esses podem ser comparados com outros iSquares de outras partes do mundo. Este artigo justifica a abordagem do iSquare como método investigativo e pedagógico, proporcionando a estudantes e educadores modos multimídia, divertidos e amplos de engajar o conceito de informação em sala de aula. Como exemplo de pesquisa visual de arte-informada, este artigo apresenta notáveis exemplos dos dados originais desenhados pelos participantes.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectivas em Ciência da InformaçãoSame topicArtistic and Creative ResearchFrench-language works237,207