MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021112985 · doi:10.12688/mniopenres.12772.2

From data sharing to data publishing

2019· article· en· W3021112985 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Baptiste Poline

Bibliographic record

VenueMNI Open Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsData publishingData sharingPublishingComputer scienceData scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data sharing, i.e. depositing data in research community accessiblerepositories, is not becoming as rapidly widespread across the life scienceresearch community as hoped or expected. I consider the sociological and cultural context of research and lay out why the community should instead move to data publishing with a focus on neuroscience data, and outline practical steps that can be taken to realize this goal.

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)0.186
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.396
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1860.396
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.023
Science and technology studies0.0080.028
Scholarly communication0.0480.067
Open science0.0100.041
Research integrity0.0080.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.013

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 head0.792
GPT teacher head0.578
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReproducibility
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMNI Open ResearchSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207