MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Information design and digital curation at the museum of the person

2024· article· en· W4403097416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gabriela de Oliveira Souza, María José Vicentini Jorente

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Information and Library Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData curationDigital curationWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web 2.0 has presented challenges and possibilities for cultural facilities and information professionals. Thinking strategically about such aspects implies creating openings for the collaboration of communities of interest in the identification of informational objects, and converging concepts, methodologies and techniques of information design, digital curation and folksonomy, which would address the challenges that emerge in the process of digitization-virtualization and availability of collections on the Web. Given this, cultural facilities must get closer to the communities of interest, as is done by the Museum of the Person (Museu da Pessoa), a digital-virtual and collaborative museum whose collection is composed of life stories. The museum uses the social technology of memory, a methodology that consists of a set of practices, concepts and principles essential for diverse communities of interest and institutions to take ownership of the production and recording of narratives. The present study asks how folksonomy, seen as a resource of information design and digital curation, can converge to the social technology of memory? Thus, the objective is to analyze the possibilities of convergence of folksonomy, information design, and digital curation to the social technology of memory. The specific objectives are to study the main concepts of folksonomy in the context of information design and digital curation, analyze the social technology of memory, and identify possible convergences of folksonomy in methodology. The methodology applied in the present study is theoretical, exploratory, and qualitative, and the method applied was design thinking.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.018
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Information and Library ScienceSame topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207