MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046721769 · doi:10.3233/sji-200658

A vision on future advanced data collection

2020· article· en· W3046721769 on OpenAlexaff
Irene Salemink, Stéphane Dufour, Marcel van der Steen

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Journal of the IAOS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData collectionMetadataConfidentialityBig dataComputer scienceData scienceData governanceData qualityProcess (computing)BusinessKnowledge managementMarketingWorld Wide WebData miningComputer securitySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Society’s demand for data-driven, fact-based information continues to increase. National statistical offices play a critical role in providing this demand-driven information to support evidence-based policy making. Thereby transforming from suppliers of official statistics to providers of trusted smart statistics. The digital transformation, data revolution and emergence of “big data” all influence the way NSOs collect data. Data are everywhere, generated by everything and everyone being stored in numerous locations and devices. The nature of data collection is bound to change. Using solely primary data collection would be too time-consuming, costly and burdensome to satisfy the increasing demand. NSOs should aim to use the vast amounts of data available in our digital society to be used as inputs for new statistical products, to supplement existing data acquisition or as replacements for existing survey inputs. Many areas must be taken into account including new data sources, collection methods and collection process redesigns. This comes with consequences with respect to methodology, technology, quality, metadata and standards, confidentiality, privacy etc. Knowledge development requires collaboration between NSOs, governments, end users, academic institutions, research organizations and private sector companies. Social acceptability needs to increase to maximize the benefit of these data sources to produce smart statistics.

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)0.180
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.145
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1800.145
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.017
Scholarly communication0.0240.051
Open science0.0100.015
Research integrity0.0160.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.009

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Journal of the IAOSSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207