MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108638207 · doi:10.1139/facets-2020-0008

Open government data and environmental science: a federal Canadian perspective

2020· article· en· W3108638207 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dominique G. Roche, Mónica Granados, Claire C. Austin, Scott Wilson, Gregory Mitchell, Paul A. Smith, Steven J. Cooke, Joseph Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsDiscoverabilityOpen dataOpen governmentGovernment (linguistics)InteroperabilityData managementData curationPublic relationsData sciencePolitical scienceBusinessComputer scienceWorld Wide WebDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments worldwide are releasing data into the public domain via open government data initiatives. Many such data sets are directly relevant to environmental science and complement data collected by academic researchers to address complex and challenging environmental problems. The Government of Canada is a leader in open data among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, generating and releasing troves of valuable research data. However, achieving comprehensive and FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) open government data is not without its challenges. For example, identifying and understanding Canada’s international commitments, policies, and guidelines on open data can be daunting. Similarly, open data sets within the Government of Canada are spread across a diversity of repositories and portals, which may hinder their discoverability. We describe Canada’s federal initiatives promoting open government data, and outline where data sets of relevance to environmental science can be found. We summarize research data management challenges identified by the Government of Canada, plans to modernize the approach to open data for environmental science and best practices for data discoverability, access, and reuse.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0180.037
Science and technology studies0.0310.028
Scholarly communication0.0310.014
Open science0.0070.010
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207