MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899033647 · doi:10.1145/3274381

StreamWiki

2018· article· en· W2899033647 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)MultimediaVotingWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge-sharing live streams are distinct from traditional educational videos, at least because of the large concurrently-viewing audience and the real-time discussions between viewers and the streamer. Though this creates unique opportunities for interactive learning, it also brings a challenge for creating a useful archive for post hoc learning. This paper presents the results of interviews with knowledge sharing streamers, their moderators, and viewers to understand current experiences and needs for sharing and learning knowledge through live streaming. Based on those findings, we built StreamWiki, a tool which leverages the viewers during live streams to produce useful archives of the interactive learning experience. On StreamWiki, moderators initiate tasks that viewers complete by conducting microtasks, such as writing a summary, commenting, and voting for informative comments. As a result, a summary document is built in real time. Through the tests of our prototype with streamers and viewers, we found that StreamWiki could help understanding the content and the context of the stream, during the stream and for post hoc learning.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.337
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