MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309618885 · doi:10.1145/3555114

Exploring the Utility of Social Content for Understanding Future In-Demand Skills

2022· article· en· W4309618885 on OpenAlexaff
Jalehsadat Mahdavimoghaddam, Ayush Bahuguna, Ebrahim Bagheri

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsRoyal Bank of CanadaToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmployabilityWorkforceSeekersSocial skillsSocial mediaPublic relationsBusinessMarketingKnowledge managementPsychologyComputer scienceEconomicsPedagogyPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid technological innovations, especially in the information technology space, demand the workforce to be vigilant by acquiring new skills to remain relevant and employable. The workforce needs to be engaged in a continuous lifelong learning process by educating themselves about skills that will be in demand in the future. To do so, it is essential for students, job seekers, and even recruiters to know which skills will be in demand in the future and to invest time and resources in developing these skills. On this basis, the main objective of this paper is to investigate whether social content can offer insight into potential future in-demand skills in the IT job market. Based on the analysis of social content from Reddit and job posting data from Dice and Monster websites, we find that social content related to job skills is a strong indicator for future in-demand skills. We further find that specific social content associated with recruitment-related topics are stronger indicators of future skills. Our findings encourage learners and job seekers to pay close attention to online social content to strategically plan new skills and maximize their employability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.094 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207