MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891500209

Are Electricity Prosumers More Engaged? An Analysis of Brand-Follower Engagement on Twitter

2018· article· en· W2891500209 on OpenAlexaff
Jacqueline Corbett, Tony Savarimuthu, Mahmoud Mohanna

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricitySocial mediaBusinessComputer scienceAdvertisingEngineeringWorld Wide WebElectrical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By leveraging new information systems and technologies, social media and the smart grid are transforming the company-customer relationship and providing opportunities for co-creation of value. In the smart grid, individuals will be able to participate in distributed renewable energy generation, for instance by installing rooftop solar panels. In effect, many customers will become electricity ‘prosumers’. As a result, there will be a need for greater shared understanding of environmental and renewable energy concerns between utilities and their customers. Although the current use of social media by electric utilities is limited, it could represent an important media choice for creating engagement with their customers. In this research, we analyzed 7180 tweets of 31 U.S. utilities over a five-month month period. We found that utilities with more prosumers are more active and have higher follower engagement on renewable energy tweets. Practical implications and directions for future research are presented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207