MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399627079 · doi:10.1075/ld.00175.let

Different levels of co-construction in dialogue

2024· article· en· W4399627079 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Dialogue · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeDimension (graph theory)Context (archaeology)Action (physics)Adaptation (eye)Work (physics)SociologyEpistemologyPsychologyEngineeringGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A completed research-action project on Climate change adaptation at the regional level (Memphremagog, Québec, Canada) is revisited here, which requires first to briefly recall what is the CCA program, and the project’s context, goals, and characteristics. The aim of the paper is to clarify issues of co-construction in dialogue, implementing a way to analytically distinguish phases of co-construction at the level of the research team’s effort along the project, by following important dialogue episodes. Stemming out of this dialogue analysis, another contribution of this work is to propose a better picture of the internal relationship between three important components of the normative dimension of such projects: pursued values, processual values, and the prescriptions that were required to actualize these values.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.335 · 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