MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216662973 · doi:10.1287/orsc.2021.1524

Learning by Connecting: How Rule Networks Evolve Through Discovery of Relevance

2021· article· en· W3216662973 on OpenAlexaffabout
Martín Schulz, Kejia Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Context (archaeology)Knowledge managementCitationProcess (computing)Computer scienceData sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning-by-connecting, the formation of connections between lessons, is a fairly common phenomenon, but how does it evolve? We argue that learning-by-connecting unfolds as the relevance of lessons to other lessons is gradually discovered over time. The process of “relevance discovery” unfolds through a dynamic interplay between lessons and their context that provides opportunities to discover the relevance of lessons to other lessons. We develop a theoretical model in which the availability of these opportunities and their sorting in time drive the formation of connections. We explore and test our model in the context of organizational rules that we conceptualize, following rule-based learning theories, as repositories of lessons learned. Our empirical context is the formation of citation ties between clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), a type of organizational rules in healthcare, in a Canadian regional healthcare organization. We find that citation tie formation intensifies when opportunities to discover relevance become available. We also find that learning-by-connecting creates rule networks in which the formation of new ties slows down due to the sorting of opportunities in time. Our findings support our assumption that learning-by-connecting is shaped by relevance discovery. Our study extends models of rule-based learning and contributes to discussions on the formation of connections in contexts of dispersed learning and knowledge.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganization ScienceSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207