Novel Use of Social Media Big Data and Artificial Intelligence for Community Resilience Assessment (CRA) in University Towns
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
University towns face many challenges in the 21st century due to urbanization, increased student population, and higher educational institutions’ inability to house all their students on-campus. For university towns to be resilient and sustainable, the challenges facing them must be assessed and addressed. To carry out community resilience assessments, this study adopted a novel methodological framework to harness the power of artificial intelligence and social media big data (user-generated content on Twitter) to carry out remote studies in six university towns on six continents using Text Mining, Machine Learning, and Natural Language Processing. Cultural, social, physical, economic, and institutional and governance community challenges were identified and analyzed from the historical big data and validated using an online expert survey. This study gives a global overview of the challenges university towns experience due to studentification and shows that artificial intelligence can provide an easy, cheap, and more accurate way of conducting community resilience assessments in urban communities. The study also contributes to knowledge of research in the new normal by proving that longitudinal studies can be completed remotely.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it