MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313387989 · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-2080-6_13

Big Science and Little Science in Open and Distance Digital Education

2023· book-chapter· en· W4313387989 on OpenAlex
Heather Kanuka

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHandbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceBrigham Young University
KeywordsBig dataOpen scienceData scienceOpen educationEngineering ethicsComputer scienceData collectionSociologyWorld Wide WebEngineeringSocial scienceData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter provides a discussion of big science and little science. An overview of the definitions and uses of each is provided, as well as data collection and analysis practices, inclusive of a range of digital data analysis tools for research projects in open, distance, and digital education. A discussion is also provided on the promises, opportunities, controversies, and complications of big data and little data, as well as the possibilities of working with both forms of data collection. Insights based on the literature are highlighted, providing suggestions for practice when working with big data and/or little data. The chapter concludes with questions and suggestions for further research and implications for open, distance, and digital education that arise from the literature.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0170.006
Open science0.0030.004
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.275 · 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