MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557523911 · doi:10.15353/joci.v12i3.3284

Digital Cultural Heritage and Social Sustainability

2016· article· en· W2557523911 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chern Li Liew, Gobinda Chowdhury

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilitySocial sustainabilityCultural heritagePublic relationsSustainability organizationsSustainability scienceCultural sustainabilityEquity (law)BusinessLiteracyCommunity engagementPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigated factors that were perceived to contribute to the social sustainability of cultural heritage information services. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with sixteen users, guided by three broad questions: 1. Which factors they consider are important for DCH services to be socially sustainable or to achieve social sustainability? 2. What indicators they perceive from current DCH services that suggest social sustainability? 3. What they believe to be the main challenges for DCH services to achieve or maintain social sustainability? Social sustainability of DCH information services was associated with: strategy and policy, advocacy and community engagement, equity, cultural sensitivity and literacy, assessment and evaluation.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0000.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207