Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the article is studying modern trends in digital development and developing a universal model of digital research universities. The methodology of the research is based on the use of methods: analysis and comparison for the study of scientific thought in the field of the introduction of digital technologies in the activities of research universities of systematization in the process of singling out the spheres of use of digital technologies in the activities of research universities; graphics for developing a model of digital research universities. The research results are manifested in the generalized development of global scientific thought for the period of 2011-2018. On the use of digital technologies in research universities in the United States, Britain, Germany, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Italy, South Africa, Brazil, Ireland, Finland, India. The results identify the current trends in global scientific research on the introduction of digital technologies concerning issues: the effectiveness of the formation of students' own curriculum; digitization of scientific information; the emergence and development of digital scholarships in scientific libraries; studying the correlation between the number of downloaded articles from the digital space and the number of new articles being written; a reappraisal of the revolutionary role of digital technologies in the social sciences; the rationale for American scientists to create a new model that provides access to the academic platform for a global society; intensification of the exchange of digital data; analysis and comparison of advantages and disadvantages of digital storages; search for new components of research tools based on the study of digital methods; the global development of digital technologies and the enhancement of the effectiveness of digital research cooperation; the widespread use of the Internet and other digital resources on the activities of research universities to improve the quality and semantic consistency of metadata, allowing to identify the digital preservation of research material. The proposed author's definition of "digital research university" harmonized the scientific categorical apparatus in accordance with modern trends in the development of digital technologies in research universities. The practical implications of introducing this category in widespread use will be reflected in the rethinking of the role of research universities and the search for new forms of introducing digital technologies. The difference between the proposed category and the term "digital university", already used in scientific consumption, is the wider coverage of the characteristics of research activities of research universities using digital technologies. The systematization of the use of digital technologies in research universities has made it possible to identify ten main areas: automation of the management systems of research universities digitizing literary sources in scientific libraries; automation of the educational process; online teaching; conducting final control; repository of diploma and doctoral thesis; student, teaching and research social networks; implementation of joint research online in digital networks; exchange of scientific data. Identified spheres form a system of digital means for the educational and scientific activities of research universities. Their characteristics allow highlighting the effects that arise in the process of introducing digital technologies in research universities. A three-level model of digital research universities has been developed. It combines nine basic elements: electronic portfolio; digital depository; digital training of teachers and researchers; an online platform for teaching; R&D market; research framing; virtual social networks; digital research networks; evaluation of research quality. The proposed three levels of the model reveal the basic role of its elements for the digital development of research universities and provide: the necessary internal infrastructure; maximizing the effects of using digital technologies; international subjectivization of research universities. The author's definition of each element of the developed model is provided, disclosed their digital purpose, and enriched the categorical apparatus. The practical significance of the developed model is ensuring that the maximum is obtained from the use by the research universities of the digital technologies of the present, and waiting for humanity in a strategic future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".