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
Widespread technology usage has resulted in a deluge of data that is not limited to scientific domains. For example, technology companies accumulate vast amounts of data on their users to support their applications and platforms. The participation of many domains in big data collection, data analysis and visualization, and the need for fast data exploration has provided a stellar market opportunity for high quality data visualization software to emerge. In this talk, leading industry visualization software (Tableau) will be used to explore a biodiversity dataset ( Carex spp. distribution and morphology). The advantages and disadvantages of using Tableau for scientific exploration will be discussed, as well as how to integrate data visualization tools early into the data pipeline. Lastly, the potential for developing a data visualization "stack" (i.e., a combination of software products and programming languages) using available tools will be discussed, as well as what the future might look like for scientists looking to capitalize on the growth of industry tools.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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