MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788668404 · doi:10.1086/703508

The Outcome of the ArtFrame Project: A Domain-Specific BIBFRAME Exploration

2019· article· en· W2788668404 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArt Documentation Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataCatalogingPresentation (obstetrics)Library scienceOntologyDomain (mathematical analysis)Extension (predicate logic)World Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ArtFrame Project, a part of the Linked Data for Production (LD4P) collaboration, was a domain-specific, linked-open-data (LOD) initiative that explored the metadata practices of art libraries and museums. The project, headed by Columbia University Libraries and including major art institutions and the Cataloging Advisory Committee (CAC) of the Art Libraries Society of North America (ARLIS/NA), focused on developing an extension to the Bibliographic Framework Initiative (BIBFRAME) tailored to the needs of art catalogers. This article describes the history of the project and its collaboration with the LD4P Rare Materials Extension Group to produce a shared ontology, the Art & Rare Materials BIBFRAME Ontology Extension (ARM).[This article is an expansion of a presentation at the ARLIS/NA conference held in New York, New York, in February 2018.]

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.011
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.220 · 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