MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233561200 · doi:10.3233/ip-2010-0219

World Wide Research: Reshaping the Sciences and Humanities, by William H. Dutton and Paul W. Jeffreys, eds

2010· article· en· W4233561200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Polity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this edited book is to convey the benefits, challenges, opportunities, and risks that enable 21st century science and the humanities to make discoveries that advance scientific knowledge in a new computational world.Its editors and the fifty-four other contributors of this thirty-nine chapter volume set out to help us understand the complex social (institutional) and technical environment of 'e-research', several decades ago labeled 'Big Science' and now known by various names such as 'e-science', 'e-infrastructure', 'cyberinfrastructure', 'grid computing', 'grid-enabled research', 'virtual research environment', 'collaboratories', and 'research-centered computational networks'.Its editors tell us that this volume is a "wide-angle lens snapshot of the evolution of e-research about a decade after this phenomenon first emerged" (p.344), its emergence resulting from funding decisions by government research agency policy makers in the United Kingdom and United States between the latter part of the 1980s and early 21st century.The book is to "serve as a roadmap charted at a particular point in the progress of e-research, with signposts to likely future dynamics and issues" (p.347).This roadmap requires a variety of perspectives, and the sociological and the technological provide the foundations for this book.Its two editors Dutton and Jeffreys represent, respectively, the social scientist and the computer scientist-cum-technologist.Dutton focuses on the non-technological landscape framed as the social shaping of sociotechnical (eco)systems, which argues that consequences and outcomes cannot be predicted in advance.Jeffreys's interests lie principally in constructing the built computational environment that provides the infrastructure for progress in science.Their colleagues, whose thinking is mostly reflected in two or three page essays, are drawn from university, government, and industry and are long-time as well as novice participants in science and technology research and science policy in their home countries, largely the United Kingdom but also Canada, China, Europe, Latin America and the United States.No matter their national origin, however, their assessment of e-research reflects a commitment to the Mertonian norms of 'open science'.This edited volume is a product of their collaborations with the University of Oxford Internet Institute and its e-research initiatives, including the e-Horizon and Oxford e-Social Science conferences in 2006 and 2008.Dutton and Jeffreys introduce the reader to the advanced computational and network capabilities that lead to opportunities and risks to the e-research environment.Part I entitled "Foundations" sets the agenda for the volume.Chapter 1 "Reconfiguring Access in Research: Information, Expertise, and Experience" utilises the social shaping of technology perspective to describe the research environment (Dutton).Three short essays follow that describe the development of cyberinfrastructure (Bowker and colleagues), role of webometrics (Thelwall), and how the distribution of hyperlinks follows a 'power law' (Ackland).Chapter 2 "The Developing Conception of e-Research" describes the origins and growth of grid computing, explains the meaning of e-infrastructure and its social dimensions, and discusses the future of virtual collaborative organisations with a focus on the ease of use of complex technologies and services.Three short essays follow on the construction of a research platform (Hey and colleagues), the evolution in the scale and diversity of participation, content, collaboration, and infrastructure (de Roure), and how Internet technologies and the Web are altering the practices of firms and other organisations (Taylor).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.014
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.009

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation PolitySame topicHistory of Science and MedicineFrench-language works237,207