MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240516920

Data Management for Graduate Students: A case study at Oregon State University

2015· article· en· W2240516920 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical academic librarianship · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduate studentsQuarter (Canadian coin)Value (mathematics)State (computer science)Academic libraryPosition (finance)Data managementComputer scienceLibrary scienceMedical educationMathematics educationPsychologyMedicineBusinessGeographyData mining
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On academic campuses, graduate students produce data and that data is often being lost. This paper describes the efforts at Oregon State University to educate graduate students on the value of their data and of preserving it. Graduate students were interviewed and from this information a successful data management workshop was created and has been updated and presented each quarter in the library. Librarians at other academic institutions may be in position to help graduate students on their campuses realize the value of their data and prevent valuable data from being lost. This case study serves as one example of what libraries can provide.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.082
Open science0.0090.020
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.607
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.135 · 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