MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891330240 · doi:10.36151/reei.48.10

Influencers, consejos inexactos y responsabilidad en la era digital

2024· article· es· W6891330240 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunication and COVID-19 Impact
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfluencer marketingAdvice (programming)PersonaPerspective (graphical)The Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise of social networks and the figure of influencers has given rise to new scenarios regarding civil liability. This work reflects on the erroneous or inaccurate health advice that these Influencers sometimes give, and that can cause harm to those people who decide to follow them. All of this from a private international perspective, while the content uploaded to social networks is accessible practically worldwide.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.339 · 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
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 venueRevista Electrónica de Estudios InternacionalesSame topicCommunication and COVID-19 ImpactFrench-language works237,207