Datastorr: a workflow and package for delivering successive versions of 'evolving data' directly into R
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sharing and re-use of data has become a cornerstone of modern science. Multiple platforms now allow easy publication of datasets. So far, however, platforms for data sharing offer limited functions for distributing and interacting with evolving datasets- those that continue to grow with time as more records are added, errors fixed, and new data structures are created. In this article, we describe a workflow for maintaining and distributing successive versions of an evolving dataset, allowing users to retrieve and load different versions directly into the R platform. Our workflow utilizes tools and platforms used for development and distribution of successive versions of an open source software program, including version control, GitHub, and semantic versioning, and applies these to the analogous process of developing successive versions of an open source dataset. Moreover, we argue that this model allows for individual research groups to achieve a dynamic and versioned model of data delivery at no cost.
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 | 0.017 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.059 |
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".