MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947843646 · doi:10.1080/14606925.2019.1595864

Models of Collective Working. Insights on the Scottish Context

2019· article· en· W2947843646 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Docherty, David McGillivray

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Design Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)SociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a project -Collective Futures -a researcherpractitioner collaboration exploring the nature and models of creative collectives in Scotland through a design thinking approach.Collectives are proposed as a new way of working and an unintended stimulus for social change: reducing isolation, and empowering creative practitioners to remain within their preferred communities with access to personal and professional networks.Design thinking is connected to action research and is recognised as an enabler to embrace differing perspectives while exploring flexible structures that give a shared purpose for effective collaborative working within the creative and cultural sector.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Design JournalSame topicResearch in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207