MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005150842 · doi:10.14763/2019.2.1418

The recursivity of internet governance research

2019· article· en· W3005150842 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

VenueInternet Policy Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet governanceThe InternetNormativeCorporate governanceTheme (computing)Power (physics)Political scienceSociologyInternet researchDemocracyPublic relationsMedia studiesPublic administrationPoliticsLawWorld Wide WebManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This special issue of Internet Policy Review is the second to bring together the best policy-oriented papers presented at the annual conference of the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR). The conference in Montral, in October 2018, was organised around the theme of "Transnational materialities". As explained in the editorial to this issue, the contributions map the larger debate on internet governance research in terms of perspectives rather than disciplines. The eleven papers in this issue span a wide range of topics, including normative perspectives on how platforms shape democracy, conceptual perspectives on how to think platform power, and social and legal views on data-driven governance.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.363 · 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