MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471310903 · doi:10.4242/balisagevol9.zhao01

Quality Control Practice for Scholars Portal, an XML-based E-journals Repository

2012· article· en· W2471310903 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBalisage series on markup technologies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMathematics, Computing, and Information Processing
Canadian institutionsOntario Council of University Libraries
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkflowXMLWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalSet (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Control (management)DatabaseProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario Scholars Portal (SP) is an XML based digital repository containing over 31,000,000 articles from more than 13,000 full text journals of 24 publishers which covers every academic discipline. Starting in 2006, SP began adopting NLM Journal Archiving and Interchange Tag Set v2.3 for its XML based E-journals system using MarkLogic. The publishers' native data is transformed to NLM Tag Set in SP in order to normalize data elements to a single standard for archiving, display and searching. Scholars Portal has established extremely high standards for ensuring that the content loaded into Scholars Portal is accurate and complete. Through the entire workflow from data ingest , data conversion and data display, quality control procedures have been implemented to ensure the integrity of the digital repository.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.297 · 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