MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940481073 · doi:10.1002/gdj3.62

From books to bytes: A new data rescue tool

2019· article· en· W2940481073 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Victoria Slonosky, Renée Sieber, Gordon Burr, Lori Podolsky, Robert Smith, Madeleine Bartlett, Eun Park, Jeremy Cullen, Frédéric Fabry

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscience Data Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceData mappingOpen dataWorld Wide WebTraceabilityLinked dataData scienceSchema (genetic algorithms)Unstructured dataContext (archaeology)Information retrievalDatabaseData miningSemantic WebSoftware engineeringBig data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Historical data provides observational information crucial to our understanding of the evolution of geophysical processes. However, there is a gap between predigital age observations, which are typically handwritten, and data that is discoverable and analysable. The data rescue protocols here address this gap, covering the information lifecycle from handwritten register pages to transcription‐ready content, describing the historical data, the database design for the data rescue, and the development of an application design to transcribe the meteorological information directly from an image file to the database. The preparatory steps necessary to organize, curate, image, and structure the meteorological information, prior to transcribing the historical data, are outlined here in an integrated methodology. The initial organization, the development of an image file nomenclature to link the rescued data to the original source, and the description of a metadata schema to optimize the transcription application are all vital to the process of ensuring traceability and transparency in the data rescue process. Taken together, these steps describe best practices guidelines for similar projects. Although we designed the methodology and application to be used in any data rescue context, our particular concern was to accommodate the needs of citizen scientists. We thus focused on making our application easily maintained, flexible, direct to database, clear, and simple to use. Open Practices This article has earned an Open Data badge for making publicly available the digitally‐shareable data necessary to reproduce the reported results. The data is available at https://citsci.geog.mcgill.ca . Learn more about the Open Practices badges from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.017
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.040

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscience Data JournalSame topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207