Introduction to the Special Issue on Human-Computer Interaction in the Web 2.0 Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Web 2.0, the “dynamic web,” is one of the most effective applications to date of information and communication technologies in the way it revolutionized how individuals interact with information. The term Web 2.0 is largely associated with Tim O’Reilley (Graham, 2005; O’Reilley, 2005), and is a loosely defined concept that represents a variety of technologies. Some of these are development platforms while others are applications used mostly for social computing and interaction. The latter group of technologies, also known as the Social Web (Rheingold, 2000) has arguably been in the core of the World Wide Web from its conception (Porter, 2008). Moreover, the developmental components of Web 2.0 that moved computing beyond desktops via the use of web-based “building blocks” such as web services not only made it possible to realize the true potential of the social web, but to a large extent made it synonymous with Web 2.0. Our use of the term Web 2.0 also treats it as identical to the social web.</p>
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".