MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107810082 · doi:10.31542/cb.v2i1.1989

Tweeting Through COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3107810082 on OpenAlex
Tamara Hansen

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing Borders Student Reflections on Global Social Issues · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial distanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SolidarityPandemicIsolation (microbiology)Social isolationGovernment (linguistics)Social media2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMental healthPsychologySample (material)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Public healthPublic relationsSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceMedicineVirologyPsychiatryPoliticsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assessed public sentiments regarding the COVID-19 pandemic through a content analysis of 100 Twitter posts made on March 31, 2020, following the introduction of gathering restrictions and social distancing measures. This analysis identified nine themes, including (in order of prevalence): self-isolation activities, reactions to government actions, humour, prevention, emotion, positivity, mental health, statistics, and personal experiences. The most common themes found were related to how people were spending their time in self-isolation (21% of posts analyzed) and reactions to steps taken by various levels of governments (19% of posts). The results demonstrated, overall, an optimistic outlook among a sample of Twitter users towards the COVID-19 pandemic, a sense of solidarity, and a willingness of these users to observe measures to try and stop the spread of the virus.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.393 · 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