MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313968846 · doi:10.5270/oceanobs09.cwp.18

Ocean and Coastal Data Stewardship

2010· article· en· W2313968846 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Computational Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Weather ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Computer scienceOceanographyRemote sensingEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the ocean community looks to the next decade of ocean observations, end-to-end data management must be considered as an integral part of the design of any ocean observing system. Ocean data stewardship ensures that observations deliver the maximum service to society. Ocean data stewardship means more than mere mechanical or electronic acts of data archiving and transfer. It consists of an integrated suite of functions to preserve and realize the full value of environmental data. Data stewards and data providers need to work toward standardization of vocabularies and formats, quality and complete metadata, and making the archival and dissemination of data a part of the initial design of an observing system. These functions must be successfully implemented to ensure optimal use of oceanographic data and information, both now and in future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.280 · 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