Bibliographic record
Abstract
The editorial for the 2011 McMaster Journal of Communication issue on communities, publics and communication. The editorial presents the five articles contained in the issue ( “Redefining Gatekeeping Theory for a Digital Generation.” Lianne Chin-Fook and Heather Simmonds; “‘That Worries Me’: Affective and Rhetorical Framing in News Programming of The O’Reilly Factor”, Joey Brooke Jakob; “Public sphere, alternative media and social involvement in Belarus: The role of an individual in history”, Nataliya Lesnikova; “The Politics of Transparency”, Robyn Lew; “Creating Cellular Vision: Cell Phone Photography and the (Shifting) Photographic Eye”, Robert Vitulano) and acknowledges the help of the editorial committee members, Alyssa Lai and Christine Larabie; as well as that of faculty editor, Dr. Alex Sévigny.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.014 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".