MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rechat: Ferramenta para Estudo do Comportamento de Usuários em Sistemas de Bate-papo do Estilo WhatsApp

2020· article· en· W3116333866 on OpenAlexaff
Lucian Rossoni Ribas, Luiz Gomes-Jr, Thiago H. Silva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceChatbotWorld Wide WebMobile deviceMisinformationHuman–computer interactionMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spread of misinformation, hate speech, or sexist discourse had become a significant problem, especially on chat platforms. This article describes a data collection and processing tool to support research on users’ behavior exposed to these contents. Our motivation is the recent need to study profiles that propagate this type of information and the need to understand these new dissemination mechanisms. This tool provides a web configuration panel and a mobile application for data collection. Using a chatbot mechanism, the panel allows researchers to perform personalized experiments to analyze specific issues. The application collects the user’s basic profile, allows interaction with the chatbots sent by the researcher, and runs on the volunteers’ devices, similar to a real messaging application such as WhatsApp or Telegram. The data generated regarding the user’s interactions with the application can be exported for analysis through the panel. Also, we describe the insertion of optional codes that can be executed in parallel to the conversations, helping in sophisticated personalizations. We believe that the proposed open-source tool will help researchers from different areas, even without computer programming skills, to understand fundamental mechanisms of user behavior in mobile chat systems.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207