Institutional repository digital object metadata enhancement and re-architecting
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present work undertaken at our institutional repository to enhance metadata and re-organize digital objects according to new information architecture, in an effort to minimize administrative object management and processing, and improve object discovery and use. This work was partly motivated by the launch of a new discovery platform at our institution, which aggregates metadata and full text from our four open access repositories into a cohesive, consistent, and enhanced searching and browsing experience. The platform provides digital object identifier (DOI) assignment, metadata access via various formats, and an open metadata and full text application program interface (API) for researchers, amongst other features. Functionality of these platform features relies heavily on accurate object representation and metadata. This work facilitates and improves the discovery and engagement of the diverse digital objects available from our institution, so they can be used and analyzed in new, flexible, and innovative ways by a myriad of communities and disciplines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.090 | 0.172 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it