MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030902314 · doi:10.17613/44jyt-kg363

Advancing Open: Views from Scholarly Communications Practitioners

2020· article· en· W3030902314 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lindsey MacCallum, Ann Barrett, Leah Vanderjagt, Amy Buckland

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceScholarly communicationSAINTPolitical scienceMountSociologyMedia studiesEngineeringHistoryComputer sciencePublishingArt historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report acknowledges the sponsors whose contributions made Advancing Open possible: the Canadian Research Knowledge Network (CRKN), SPARC, University of Alberta Libraries, Dalhousie University, University of Guelph Library, Mount Saint Vincent University Library, University of Ottawa Library, and University of Saskatchewan Library.

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)0.094
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.213
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0940.213
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0210.031
Scholarly communication0.0620.035
Open science0.0030.020
Research integrity0.0180.035
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207