Building a Federated, Online Social Sciences and Humanities Database of Journals and Research Communication: A Canadian Initiative.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synergies is an emerging online Canadian publishing project in the social sciences and humanities that builds on a group of online publishing initiatives that have emerged over the last decade. It involves a new partnership between libraries and journals wherein journals bring content and libraries (or IT units within universities) bring technological infrastructure consisting of maintained and secure hardware and software as well as associated services to users. Part 1 of the paper describes various initiatives and what they are bringing to the project. Part 2 reports on a survey undertaken of the state of SSH journal publishing in Canada. It focuses on attitudes to online publishing and the financial feasibility of online publishing with various models of access. Part 3 reports on the state of cultural magazine publishing and the attitudes of cultural magazines publishers to the possibility of providing online access to back issues. The paper concludes with a description of how and where the project sought resources, how they are structured, and the current state of the project.
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 | 0.021 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.034 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".