MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625586459

Notes Towards an Integrative Agenda and Community Informatics Theory

2006· article· en· W2625586459 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael Gurstein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaAustralian Government
KeywordsInformaticsSociologyPolitical scienceEpistemologyData sciencePublic relationsComputer sciencePhilosophyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research is at the very core of Community Informatics; and the basis of CI research is a recognition of the dialectical role of networked communities within the contemporary
\nenvironment. Where once communities were a necessary and taken for granted element of lived society isolated in themselves and only with precarious links to the outside
\nworld, in the modern world it is the external environment which is pervasive and
\ncommunities exist precariously and in seized and struggled for spaces within and between
\nglobally pervasive and invasive electronic networks. The “Wal-Mart” effect as a model of how the “new economy” and the new technology environment is being deployed is one where there is little space for community and where communities only exist through an act of assertion, will and ultimately struggle and notably a struggle against almost overwhelming odds. That there is an ever-extending structure of such networks both parallel and interconnected through e-governments, ecommerce systems, e-learning structures is a condition of our time and provides the framework and the backdrop for the development of Community Informatics as a critical discipline and for Community Informatics research as one of the tools in these overall efforts in responding to and resisting these encroachments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207