MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391036629 · doi:10.1007/979-8-8688-0083-2_10

Concluding Thoughts and the Future Vision

2024· book-chapter· en· W4391036629 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Thinking · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsManitoba Beekeepers' Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWonderConversationThe InternetEveryday lifeSocial lifeWork (physics)Visual artsInternet privacyMedia studiesAestheticsComputer scienceSociologyArtEngineeringWorld Wide WebCommunicationPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

That time in history when the Internet, computers, mobile devices, and social media didn’t exist was marked by communicating through regular mail more often written either by hand or with typewriters or through phones in the streets enclosed in cabins, where we had to insert coins to make them work, making the message brief and concise, or our own home phones with the long cable attached to the wall, where we could just enjoy a long conversation without having to see the other person. One might wonder if life still went by, as a regular individual with our everyday life, if we were still doing in general the same routines we do today—waking up, going to work, coming back, having family time, and enjoying vacation times here and there—why did we need all these introductions to the world of communications anyways?

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.203 · 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