MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136170812 · doi:10.11647/obp.0213.27

16. Econferences Are Not the Same, but Are They Good Enough?

2021· book-chapter· en· W3136170812 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Terry Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Book Publishers · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConferences and Exhibitions Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsFace (sociological concept)Event (particle physics)Media studiesHistoryPolitical scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Terry Anderson helped pioneer econferencing with the email-based Bangkok Project event in 1992, which took place just one year after the World Wide Web went public. In the following chapter, he reflects back on the early challenges of the online conference medium and looks ahead to its future. How has the econference evolved from its origins to today? Will online gatherings always feel like a less satisfying version of their traditional, face-to-face counterpart or can they offer conference-goers something unique?

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), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient 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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0120.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Book PublishersSame topicConferences and Exhibitions ManagementFrench-language works237,207