MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564006927 · doi:10.5268/iw-6.4.889

Generating community-built tools for data sharing and analysis in environmental networks

2016· article· en· W2564006927 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jordan S. Read, Corinna Gries, Emily K. Read, Jennifer L. Klug, Paul C. Hanson, Matthew R. Hipsey, Eleanor Jennings, Catherine M. O’Reilly, Luke Winslow, Donald C. Pierson, Christopher McBride, David P. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueUWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyGlobal Lake Ecological Observatory Network
KeywordsData scienceComputer scienceData sharingImplementationCollaborative networkScale (ratio)Environmental dataKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid data growth in many environmental sectors has necessitated tools to manage and analyze these data. The development of tools often lags behind the proliferation of data, however, which may slow exploratory opportunities and scientific progress. The Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network (GLEON) collaborative model supports an efficient and comprehensive data–analysis–insight life cycle, including implementations of data quality control checks, statistical calculations/derivations, models, and data visualizations. These tools are community-built and openly shared. We discuss the network structure that enables tool development and a culture of sharing, leading to optimized output from limited resources. Specifically, data sharing and a flat collaborative structure encourage the development of tools that enable scientific insights from these data. Here we provide a cross-section of scientific advances derived from global-scale analyses in GLEON. We document enhancements to science capabilities made possible by the development of analytical tools and highlight opportunities to expand this framework to benefit other environmental networks.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.117 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia)Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207