MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239197854 · doi:10.29173/cais1027

Coming to our senses: considerations for studying sensory information

2018· article· en· W4239197854 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sarah Polkinghorne

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensory systemFocus (optics)Order (exchange)Cognitive scienceSociologyPsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Everyone uses information gathered through the senses to understand and navigate dailylife. Despite this ubiquity, some types of sensory information have received littleattention within library and information studies (LIS). This CAIS paper analyzes onesense as an example, the sense of smell, in order to identify cultural, linguistic, andmethodological considerations for bringing it into greater focus within our discipline.This paper illustrates the complexities of studying sensory information, and argues thatdoing so will contribute to richer examinations of people’s information practices.

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)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207