MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2381688724

The policy systems of geological information services in main developed countries and its characteristics

2007· article· en· W2381688724 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Quan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueDizhi tongbao · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeological surveyInformation systemGeneral partnershipService (business)Process (computing)BusinessComputer scienceGeologyMarketingFinanceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information service policies are guidelines, fundamentals and approaches for the management and development of information services, as well as the guarantee of successfully implementing information services. In the process of information services, geological survey organizations of main developed countries, such as US Geological Survey (USGS), Canadian Geological Survey (CSC), Geoscience Australia (GA) and British Geological Survey (BGS), have formulated and executed a series of information service policies. These policies dictate the rules or guide almost all the actions of information services, including the service objects, content, pricing, partnership, information release, customer relationship and service quality. They have formed a complete policy system. This paper describes some characteristics of the policy systems of geological information services of the above-mentioned main developed countries from the following aspects: effects of information free acts and copyright on the geological information services, pricing policies and relatively complete price systems, regulation of information services with policies and standards to improve information service quality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDizhi tongbaoSame topicGeological Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207