Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relentless rise in the cost of research publications has lead to the increasing isolation of research scientists and other academic communities in the developing world. Furthermore, printing and distribution problems have lead to the invisibility of much of the research publications from less advantaged nations. The effect has been a growing north-south, south-north, and south-south poverty of research information which has had a damaging impact on the progress of research globally.\nThe extent of typical pre-OA deprivation was highlighted in 2003 by a WHO survey of access to peer-reviewed journals by medical institutes in low-income countries. This showed that the institutes in the poorest countries had purchased NO journals in the previous 5 years, and the situation was only marginally better in slightly more economically strong countries.\nThere have been a number of initiatives aimed at improving this unacceptable situation, including donor programmes and exemption from subscriptions for selected countries or reader-communities. However, by far the most encouraging development has been the growth in international acceptance of free and open access to publicly funded research output. The establishment of interoperable institutional repositories (IRs) holding an organisation’s published research, together with the conversion of journals to open access models has been widely welcomed by many organisations in the developing world and is a sustainable solution to access problems. The Electronic Publishing Trust for Development has been advocating this approach and promoting developments regionally.\nThis presentation outlines the overall growth in IRs and the establishment of OA journals in developing regions and presents encouraging usage figures by their research communities, indicating the value of increased access for developing a strong science base. An example is provided by statistics available from Bioline International, a non-profit Canada/Brazil/UK initiative, supporting the OA distribution of journals published in developing regions. OA developments in economically strong countries, both regarding policies and technical infrastructure initiatives, are considered in relation to the needs of the developing regions. To build on current progress, a series of awareness-raising and technology transfer workshops are required, together with the development and acceptance of national and institutional OA policies. Support from major international organisations should be accelerated since if global problems are to be solved, global access to research findings are a prerequisite.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".