MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405440217 · doi:10.1109/tts.2024.3476041

The Future of Work in the Age of Automation: Proceedings of a Workshop on Norbert Wiener’s 21st Century Legacy

2024· article· en· W4405440217 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather A. Love, Greg Adamson, Jason Lajoie, Iven Mareels, Zach Pearl, Daniel Schiff, Ketra Schmitt, Thirumala Arohi, Stéphanie Camaréna, Marten Kaevats, Jeremy Reynolds, Pedro H. Albuquerque, John C. Havens, Davis Chacón‐Hurtado, Sucheta Lahiri, Ayşe Öcal, Alexi Orchard, Rebecca Sherlock, Victor Sundararaj, Qin Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Technology and Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTechnology, Environment, Urban Planning
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFederation University AustraliaYildiz Teknik ÜniversitesiSyracuse UniversityTechnische Universität MünchenPurdue UniversityCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueConcordia UniversityUniversity of Notre DameUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of ConnecticutYork University
KeywordsAutomationWork (physics)EngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article synthesizes the insights gained through presentations and discussions at the 2023 IEEE Workshop on Norbert Wiener in the 21st Century (21CW2023), which focused on “The Future of Work in the Age of Automation.” Hosted at Purdue University, this interdisciplinary convening of technologists, social scientists, and humanists explored the impacts of automation on labor, drawing on Wiener’s legacy of insights as a backdrop to examine the technologically mediated future we face in coming decades. The workshop presented a rare opportunity to reflect critically on these issues at a pivotal moment in human and technological history, and to elicit underappreciated dimensions. Areas of focus include: the qualitative and quantitative losses associated with automation and AI, the impacts automation has for questions about the meaningfulness of work, the challenges we face related to uncertainty and lack of predictability in technological advancement, and the opportunities that exist for centering human values and agency in these conversations. While acknowledging many items for concern in the context of automation in the future of work, such as the domination of economic narratives, a potential loss of qualitative texture, and the neglect of certain issues key to human identity, the authors conclude by offering optimistic visions—or calls—for redefining value and labor, preserving human agency, and embracing creative problem-solving.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.025
Scholarly communication0.0210.018
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Technology and SocietySame topicTechnology, Environment, Urban PlanningFrench-language works237,207