MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560772377 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1118394

The Picasso Project

2016· article· en· W2560772377 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathryn T. Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceMetadata repositoryMetadata managementMeta Data ServicesRDFLinked dataWorld Wide WebData dictionaryData elementData mappingDatabaseInformation retrievalSemantic Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on Statistics Canada’s <em>metadata-driven </em>architectural<em> </em>principle and metadata strategy themes: <em>drive, make available, structure</em> and <em>manage</em>, Picasso is an enterprise solution for statistical data and metadata management. Automated business rules will ensure metadata is gathered uniformly, adhering to common architecture, governance and policy instruments. Picasso, a three-year project launched in 2015, replaces local solutions with a hub for managing metadata for all surveys, administrative files and record linkage projects; a data service centre function for all ‘fit for use’ data files; and enterprise search and discovery using metadata to facilitate reuse of information. New tools and components include a metadata designer with an entity lifecycle management and registration process. The solution architecture is based on a hybrid relational/semantic graph (RDF) core registry and repository with a data model driven by standard vocabularies, e.g. SKOS/XKOS, PROV-O, and reference models, e.g. GSIM, DDI 4 and SDMX. Picasso component and external systems interact with the RDF core via a Data Access Layer and Entity Services to access metadata entities via Common Information Exchange Models. Standard vocabularies and models ensure efficient information exchange internally and to external users through the Agency’s website and Research Data Centres.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1480.063

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 head0.496
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.016 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207