MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404043775 · doi:10.1080/14778238.2024.2420816

Implementing an unlearning approach to combat counter-knowledge in multiple sclerosis

2024· article· en· W4404043775 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

VenueKnowledge Management Research & Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementKnowledge sharingMultiple sclerosisBusinessData scienceComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the social domain, the term counter-knowledge has been used to refer to misinformation, gossip, rumours, and conspiracy theories that masquerade as knowledge. An individual’s assimilation of such counter-knowledge can lead to inappropriate individual behaviours and organisational decision-making. This study proposes a framework for investigating the relationship between counter-knowledge and learning myopia at the individual level in the healthcare domain, focusing on Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Given that those suffering from MS can experience symptoms leading to both a slowing down of information processing and a limited capacity. It is argued that these symptoms are likely to lead to exacerbating other symptoms, such as anxiety and depression. In addition to investigating how social counter-knowledge results in individual counter-knowledge, the research proposes a framework for understanding the challenges of implementing machine unlearning approaches, and a set of strategies to disrupt this linkage is also proposed.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.252 · 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