MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378070897 · doi:10.31542/cb.v5i1.2529

The Iranian Movement, Women, Life, and Freedom

2023· article· en· W4378070897 on OpenAlex

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing Borders Student Reflections on Global Social Issues · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationTheme (computing)Movement (music)Content analysisFreedom of movementPsychologySocial psychologyContent (measure theory)Gender studiesSociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceAestheticsLawCommunicationArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study looked at public reactions by analyzing comments posted to Facebook regarding the movement for freedom in Iran and the protests that erupted after the death of an Iranian woman. A content analysis of 60 comments revealed that between November 9 to November 16 of 2022, four prevalent themes emerged. These themes included: fear, women, support, and arguments. The most frequently mentioned theme was the arguments category, making up 30% of the sample. Supportive comments were 28 %, while women made up 27%, and the fear category was 15% of the total sum of comments. The results showed overall support for the movement and women. At the same time, a level of concern was expressed, and users engaged in conversation and arguments to indicate their opinions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.412 · 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