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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the creativity of students between the different groups of users in the virtual social networks.The methodology of the research was cross-sectional and comparative and collecting data is a kind of survey research.The statistical society of this study consisted of all the students who studied in Tehran Science and Research University in academic years 2016-2017.The available sampling method in this research was 200 individuals.The hypotheses of the research have been studied by using statistical methods of ANOVA.The descriptive results and the analysis of variance totally showed that the creativity of students who have the moderate activity in the virtual network (Group 2 and 3) were more than the students with extreme activity (Group 4) or with too little activity (Group 1).As a result, it can be said that the optimal usage and the amount of moderate time in the virtual social network can have a positive effect on the students' creativity; but the extreme usage of these networks causes to reduce the creativity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.935 | 0.973 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it