MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101532401 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3879031

How to weave domain specific information sources into a large, FAIR data fabric for the Digital Humanities? The use of the Dataverse platform.

2020· article· en· W3101532401 on OpenAlex
Philipp Conzett, Twan Goosen, Andrea Scharnhorst, Vyacheslav Tykhonov, Dieter Van Uytvanck, Jerry de Vries, Marion Wittenberg

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueKNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsCanarie
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsDigital humanitiesDomain (mathematical analysis)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Good data curation and data management is a precondition for any replication of research. Research data and research tools are often intricately coupled. But increasingly, digital methodology in the humanities depends on the combination and re-use of data sources outside of their primary area of collection and curation. As those data sources need to be accessible (on-line) in a distributed manner, a holistic approach to curate them becomes more and more important. In this paper, we discuss how a data repository platform (Dataverse) which by default comes with a generic set of metadata can be adapted for the needs of a specific research community (CLARIN).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0090.007
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.030 · 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