MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375867964 · doi:10.5210/fm.v28i5.12682

Platformization of Korean Internet portals toward mega-platforms: A historical approach

2023· article· en· W4375867964 on OpenAlexaff
Dal Yong Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueFirst Monday · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMerge (version control)The InternetInformation and Communications TechnologyBusinessWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper documents the evolution of Korea’s digital platforms. By using a historical approach in tandem with platformization — helpful in determining the causes behind the changing processes of new technologies — we examine the advancement of digital platforms. The digital platform era can be divided into three significant periods based on major technical advancements and corporate transformations, including the early construction of ICT infrastructure between the mid-1990s and early 2000s; the early platformization period of Internet portals amidst the smartphone revolution between the mid-2000s and mid-2010s; and the duopoly market of Naver and Kakao from the mid-2010s, after the merge of Daum and Kakao, to the present. Multiple causes led to the advent of digital platforms, both in terms of technologies and systems. Power relations developed between several major players, such as the government, corporations, and global forces. This work ultimately describes the relationship between sociocultural transitions and accompanying structural changes in digital platforms and relevant policies.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFirst MondaySame topicDigital Platforms and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207