A dataset of the activity of the git super-repository of Linux in 2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dataset documents the activity in the public portion of the git Super-repository of the Linux kernel during 2012. In a distributed version control system, such as git, the Super-repository is the collection of all the repositories (repos) used for development. In such a Super-repository, some repos will be accessible only by their owners (they are private, and are located in places that are unreachable to other users) while others are available to other members of the team. The latter public repositories are used as avenues through which commits flow from one developer to another. During the last six weeks of 2011, we proceeded to automatically discover the public portion of the Super-repository of Linux. Then, in 2012, every 3 hrs, each of these public repositories was queried to see what new commits it had and what commits had disappeared from it using a process we call continuous mining. This resulted in the identification of 533,513 different commits across 451 different public repositories and how they propagated through the Linux Super-repository, including the repository of Linus Torvalds (i.e., the main repository of the Linux kernel). This information could help us understand how kernel contributors use git, how they collaborate and how commits are integrated into the Linux kernel and into the repositories of organizations that distribute the kernel.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.007 |
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".