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
ago when the ELPUB conference series first started, the term "electronic publishing" promised all manner of potential that the Web and network technologies could bring to scholarly communication, scientific research and technical innovation.Indeed, over the last two decades we have seen tremendous developments across all these domains, and at the same time our social, economical and political lives have been completely transformed.Open Science represents one such transformation, and not surprisingly, the elements that make Open Science possible, including open access, open data, open software, and other domains of open have been regular topics presented and debated at previous ELPUB conferences.However, development and diffusion of open research practices are highly uneven across disciplines and across regions.And despite the common claims that Open Science improves transparency and accountability throughout the research life cycle while democratizing the knowledge production process, empirical research and conceptual validation of these ideas has been limited.In addition, there is a growing tendency to conceptualize Open Science as a set of conditions waiting to be met, without regard for regional differences, including cultural and historical contexts of knowledge production.The theme of the ELPUB2017 conference was Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices.It was intended to generate discussion and debate on the potential and limitations of openness.In the original Call for Papers, we invited researchers and practitioners from diverse backgrounds to share their results and ideas towards a highly interactive forum.We also asked potential presenters to consider exploring alternative models of interaction and cocreation between scholars and citizen scientists, and the role of dissemination and publishing within these interactions.To stimulate submissions, we included these questions in the open call: Who determines the agenda and direction of emerging discourses around Open Science?How does Open Science challenge the current positions and power of players and agents in varying institutional contexts?Are we seeing a converging global view of Open Science, or are there disciplinary, regional, and other differences that are important to consider?What are the gaps between existing Open Science policies, regulatory frameworks, and implementation requirements and how should they be addressed?
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.279 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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