MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109175567 · doi:10.18352/lq.7958

Facilitating Searches in Multiple Bibliographical Databases: Metadata Harvesting Service Providers

2009· article· en· W2109175567 on OpenAlexaff
Mangala Anil Hirwade, Mohini T. Bherwani

Bibliographic record

VenueLIBER Quarterly The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceMetadata repositoryDatabaseMeta Data ServicesWorld Wide WebServerData elementService (business)Database catalogSoftwareService providerInformation retrievalOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A metadata harvester is a software package that reads data from servers, writes it to databases, implements various kinds of searches, and writes HTML files to display the results. In this paper sixty metadata harvesting service providers have been studied. The study reviewed metadata generation, preservation and harvesting, and various technical issues arising at these stages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLIBER Quarterly The Journal of the Association of European Research LibrariesSame topicLibrary Science and Information SystemsFrench-language works237,207