MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401399530 · doi:10.36253/979-12-215-0413-2.10

Challenges in archiving the personalized web

2024· book-chapter· en· W4401399530 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

VenueProceedings e report · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalizationWorld Wide WebComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Key (lock)Web navigationWeb intelligenceThe InternetData scienceWeb developmentComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decision-making algorithms embedded within online platforms are determining content shown to users. This personalization steers the dissemination of information, in contrast with the idea of a universal World Wide Web. Personalization thus generates a combinatorial explosion of different versions of the web, rendering each user’s experience distinct. This raises critical questions: what elements of a personalized web should be archived? How can the collected user journeys capture a representative picture of our times? Navigating personalization is essential to capture the contemporary web experience, yet it presents methodological and technical challenges. In this chapter, we identify key challenges in performing a representative sampling of personalization within online platforms.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.272
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