MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911529586 · doi:10.1145/3308558.3313729

Generalists and Specialists: Using Community Embeddings to Quantify Activity Diversity in Online Platforms

2019· article· en· W2911529586 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralist and specialist speciesDiversity (politics)Computer scienceConstruct (python library)Measure (data warehouse)Focus (optics)Data scienceSpace (punctuation)Online communityENCODEWork (physics)Through-the-lens meteringWorld Wide WebData miningLens (geology)EcologySociologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many online platforms, people must choose how broadly to allocate their energy. Should one concentrate on a narrow area of focus, and become a specialist, or apply oneself more broadly, and become a generalist? In this work, we propose a principled measure of how generalist or specialist a user is, and study behavior in online platforms through this lens. To do this, we construct highly accurate community embeddings that represent communities in a high-dimensional space. We develop sets of community analogies and use them to optimize our embeddings so that they encode community relationships extremely well. Based on these embeddings, we introduce a natural measure of activity diversity, the GS-score.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207