MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Open access goes mainstream: Supporting the Tri-Council harmonized OA policy

2016· article· en· W2575572128 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Valerie Irvine, Leah Vanderjagt, Devin Soper, Winter Christina

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessPublic relationsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) fully supports the Tri-Agency’s decision to launch its Open Access Policy on Publications. CARL aims to foster a smooth implementation of the policy by engaging and informing researchers on the benefits of enabling free and broad access to their research findings. To that end, CARL organized this panel presentation at the CLA National Conference and Trade Show in 2014. The presentation explored several opportunities and challenges related to supporting the harmonized open access policy from the perspective of academic researchers and librarians.

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)0.338
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.418
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3380.418
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0320.038
Scholarly communication0.0920.053
Open science0.0130.056
Research integrity0.0450.036
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.006

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207