MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2266555936 · doi:10.29173/cais532

Institutional Repositories: Towards the Identification of Critical Success Factors

2013· article· en· W2266555936 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kathleen Shearer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Research Libraries
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)PublishingIntellectual propertyPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebAcademic communityScholarly communicationLibrary scienceData sciencePublic relationsBusinessComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Institutional repositories (IRs) are digital collections that capture and preserve the intellectual output of a single or multi-university community. Their aim is to provide access to scholarly material without the economic barriers that currently exist in scholarly publishing. If successful, IRs hold the promise of being very advantageous to researchers everywhere, especially those in the developing world.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0210.018
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0190.019
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207