MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W88109437

A Tutorial on Social Network Analysis for Database Practitioners.

2009· article· en· W88109437 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Symposium on Databases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisibilitySocial network analysisData scienceSocial network (sociolinguistics)Network analysisNetwork scienceWorld Wide WebComplex networkSocial media
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this tutorial is to discuss social network analysis, focusing on two main themes: the mathematical foundations and their corresponding computational aspects; and the gathering of social data and discovery of the networks. The tutorial is illustrated through ReaSoN, a system for the analysis of research networks in Computing Science under development at the University of Alberta. ReaSoN comprises of several networks between researchers and organizations, extracted automatically from bibliographic databases. The processes of gathering and cleaning the data are presented in detail. Alternative ways of comparing the visibility of nodes in the network are also discussed. The tutorial also covers the various visualizations used in ReaSoN and other prominent systems. The tutorial also covers open problems, focusing on those relevant to database researchers and practitioners

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.281 · 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