MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W806991377 · doi:10.4018/ijcini.2014070103

Big Data Analytics on the Characteristic Equilibrium of Collective Opinions in Social Networks

2014· article· en· W806991377 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataComputer scienceData scienceComputational intelligenceCollective intelligenceAnalyticsBenchmarkingCloud computingSentiment analysisFuzzy logicSet (abstract data type)Data miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Big data are products of human collective intelligence that are exponentially increasing in all facets of quantity, complexity, semantics, distribution, and processing costs in computer science, cognitive informatics, web-based computing, cloud computing, and computational intelligence. This paper presents fundamental big data analysis and mining technologies in the domain of social networks as a typical paradigm of big data engineering. A key principle of computational sociology known as the characteristic opinion equilibrium is revealed in social networks and electoral systems. A set of numerical and fuzzy models for collective opinion analyses is formally presented. Fuzzy data mining methodologies are rigorously described for collective opinion elicitation and benchmarking in order to enhance the conventional counting and statistical methodologies for big data analytics.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.248 · 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