MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977808794 · doi:10.6093/2035-8504/9603

Practices of Resistance in Social Media Discourse

2022· article· en· W6977808794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico II · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSocial mediaFace (sociological concept)Resistance (ecology)Public discourseHappeningOnline community

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grassy Narrows is sadly known for one of the worst community health crises in Canada. It came to public attention in 1970 when it was revealed that an alarming number of the community members were displaying symptoms of the Minamata disease, a form of mercury poisoning, due to the huge amount of mercury dumped into the Wabigoon river from 1962 to 1970 by a chemical plant. Despite the fact that Grassy Narrows’ leaders and activists have struggled, over the years, to bring the issue to the fore, the community has not received the help they needed to face the devastating consequences of the poisoning – which are still going on nowadays. This paper takes into account the narratives emerging from one of the main micro-blogging and social networking services, namely Twitter, to attract public attention and engage wider audience. Analysis of the tweets collected by extrapolating three hashtag streams – specifically #grassynarrows, #freegrassy, #FreeGrassyNarrows – is meant to reveal forms of counter-discourse which continue the struggle for justice. The texts included in the corpus are analysed in search for the most recurrent themes through which issues relating to Grassy Narrows are framed and awareness on vital questions is created in the online and offline world.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IISame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207