Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vanderburg’s (2005) Living in the Labyrinth of Technology, describes the seemingly ambivalent state of life and meaning within a technological society. The ubiquity and invisibility of advancing information and communication technologies (ICT’s) challenges individuals sense of self and society, and their understanding of how meaning is communicated, by whom, for what purpose, and with what outcomes. The convergence of information, communication, and technology has become an important concern in academia as is apparent in the intersecting interests of technology studies, information studies, and communication studies in areas related to the role of technology in social interaction, meaning creation, identity formation, culture, and information exchange. This intersection of fields is partly due to the convergence of information and communications with advancing technological innovation. This has given rise to the ever-expanding convergence in academic research within communications and technology studies. This is exemplified through an amassing body of research publications focusing on technology, information, and communication, along with continued growth of technology and communication oriented research activities carried out within professional associations (Society for Social Studies of Science [4S] and the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology [EASST], International Communication Association, Canadian Communication Association).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".