MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404172516 · doi:10.1145/3686919

Value Tensions in OpenStreetMap: Openness, Membership, and Policy in Online Communities

2024· article· en· W4404172516 on OpenAlexaff
Aarjav Chauhan, Dipto Sarkar, Taneea S Agrawaal, Robert Soden

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceValue (mathematics)EconometricsSociologyComputer scienceStatisticsPolitical scienceMathematicsPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The social life and long-term trajectories of online peer production communities are shaped and animated in part by value tensions that arise when distributed, heterogeneous participants are brought together into collaboration. This study of OpenStreetMap (OSM) draws upon values-based approaches to investigate how peer production communities enact their values and navigate tensions between them. We examine how conflicts within the community over the rise of corporate participation in OSM provided a stage for the articulation and enactment of community values, shedding light on the broader dynamics and trajectory of the platform and its participants. The contributions of this work include reflections on how increasing corporate participation in OSM intersects with discourses about the emancipatory potential of emerging mapping technologies, insights into the challenges of scaling membership in peer production communities, and exploring the role of values in understanding the social life and governance of online communities.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.033
Scholarly communication0.0190.030
Open science0.0020.021
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicOpen Source Software InnovationsFrench-language works237,207