MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study the Impact of COVID-19 on Twitter Users with respect to Social Isolation

2020· article· en· W3128751746 on OpenAlexaff
Simranpreet Kaur, Pallavi Kaul, Pooya Moradian Zadeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsolation (microbiology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Social isolationSocial mediaPandemicPublic healthComputer scienceCloud computingInternet privacyData science2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSocial distanceSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)World Wide WebPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health issue that has affected millions of people in many different manners. This research proposes a novel approach to study and monitor this pandemic's impact on Twitter users concerning Social Isolation. Various sets of analyses is conducted to identify potential correlations between tweets related to social isolation, people's movement trends, and their emotional status. In this research, multiple datasets are used, ranging from our own collected dataset to a huge COVID-19 twitter dataset with over 140 million tweets and from the Google mobility report to the World Health Organization dataset. A couple of cloud-based services are used to analyze this data and extract patterns and insights from them. We believe the results of this research can be used as a public health indicator to anticipate the possibility of social isolation and design the health policies accordingly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207