MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005192408

Portuguese digital diplomacy: analysis of the use of social networks by the Embassy of Portugal in Canada for the promotion of soft power

2024· dissertation· en· W7005192408 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRepositóriUM (Universidade do Minho) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortugueseSoft powerPromotion (chess)Power (physics)Context (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta dissertação explora o papel da diplomacia digital na promoção do soft power de Portugal, especificamente através do uso das redes sociais pela Embaixada de Portugal no Canadá. A pesquisa investiga como as plataformas de media social como Facebook e X (antigo Twitter) são utilizadas para aumentar a visibilidade de Portugal, interagir com o público e promover laços bilaterais entre Portugal e Canadá. O estudo baseia-se em teorias da diplomacia, soft power e marketing digital para avaliar as estratégias da embaixada e o seu impacto na posição internacional de Portugal. Esta pesquisa identifica os pontos fortes, fracos, oportunidades e ameaças das atuais iniciativas de diplomacia digital. Ao comparar essas práticas com as melhores práticas internacionais, o estudo fornece insights sobre como Portugal pode otimizar ainda mais seu soft power por meio das medias sociais, destacando a importância do engajamento consistente, promoção cultural e interação com a diáspora portuguesa. As descobertas contribuem para a compreensão de como países menores como Portugal podem alavancar ferramentas digitais para aumentar sua presença diplomática e influência global.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepositóriUM (Universidade do Minho)Same topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207