MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613955161

Venture Labor| Fifteen Implications of Networked Scholar Research for Networked Work

2017· article· en· W2613955161 on OpenAlexaffabout
Barry Wellman, Dimitrina Dimitrova, Tsahi Hayat, Guang Ying Mo, Beverly Wellman

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovation, Technology, and Society
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Public relationsSociologyPolitical scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Networked work is the venture labor of workers involved in multiple teams. Scholars are a special kind of networked workers, partially involved in temporary teams to produce findings, presentations, papers, and patents. Many networked scholars are linked across universities by common interests, data stores, opportunities for research funding, and publications. Our NAVEL team’s study of 144 Canadian scholars in the GRAND network found that already-networked scholars were more likely to be recruited into new research teams. Although network members were officially equal, senior and entrepreneurial scholars were more equal than others. Despite norms of interdisciplinarity, scholars in the same subfields sought out one another. Although the scholars used multiple digital means to communicate, in-person meetings—and hence physical proximity—ruled. .

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0180.060
Scholarly communication0.0200.020
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.481
GPT teacher head0.652
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicInnovation, Technology, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207