Meeting Scholars Where They Are: The Advanced Research Consortium (ARC) and a Social Humanities Infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Advanced Research Consortium (ARC) is the central organizing force for several virtual research environments (VREs). ARC is the hub for these period-specific nodes, which offer digital project peer review, aggregation and search technologies, and forms of community engagement. The mission of both ARC and the nodes is to construct and support a “social system” for the humanities in which the digital and the traditional can come together to develop a working social humanities infrastructure. This article discusses how the ARC infrastructure evolved from the framework of scholarly engagement developed by NINES (Networked Infrastructure for Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship) and explains how the consortium assists the scholarly community: through digital project peer review, aggregation and search, and outreach services.
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 | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.033 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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.
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".