MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020292303 · doi:10.3390/publications8020023

A Vertical Cooperation Model to Manage Digital Collections and Institutional Resources

2020· article· en· W3020292303 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Houston
KeywordsMetadataDigital collectionsWorld Wide WebService (business)Computer scienceDigital libraryFocus (optics)Node (physics)Space (punctuation)Metadata managementBusinessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The technology space of the University of Denver Libraries to manage digital collections and institutional resources isn’t relegated to one department on campus – rather, it distributed across a network of collaborators with the skills and expertise to provide that support. The infrastructure, which is comprised of an archival metadata management system (Archivespace), a digital repository (Node.js + ElasticSearch), preservation storage (ArchivesDirect), and a streaming server (Kaltura) is independently but cooperatively managed across IT, library departments and vendors. The coordinated effort of digital curation activities still allows each group to focus on the service they have the most vested interest in providing. This paper will talk about the different management and development practices involved in developing our integrated infrastructure to provide digital collections as a service.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.184 · 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