MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399423692 · doi:10.52381/icop2024.157.1

From science to story: communicating permafrost concepts with data comics

2024· report· en· W4399423692 on OpenAlexaff
Zezhong Wang, Stephan Gruber, Michelle Levy, Sheelagh Carpendale

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversitySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComicsPermafrostNarrativeVisualizationData scienceTransparency (behavior)Computer scienceScience communicationStorytellingGeovisualizationData visualizationInformation visualizationScience educationSociologyEcologyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are creating data comics that use graphics, narratives and visualization to explain permafrost and its interaction with climate change.Despite the increasing attention to permafrost change due to its local impacts and interactions with global climate, many people without scientific background or lived experience related to permafrost do not understand what permafrost is or why it is important.This knowledge gap reduces public consideration and risk perception.We are exploring new ways to present this information to a wider audience, including policymakers, scientists from other fields, school teachers, and the general public.A major communication challenge we face is that many scientific articles are not easily comprehensible and understanding concepts such as permafrost thaw and its effect on land use and infrastructure can be challenging.To address this challenge, we are developing new ideas in creating data comics, a new format that integrates data visualization and storytelling to deliver insights from data in a new format.We are exploring the use of relatable examples and analogies to make scientific information more comprehensible to the public.We are creating data comics collaboratively with experts in data visualization, narrative construction, data comics, and permafrost science.The data comics are designed to be both scientifically informed and verified, using the best and most current scientific information available.We prioritize data transparency, working towards more understandable and engaging presentations of scientific concepts.1

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.712
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207