Are we there yet? science-based roadmaps for astronomy technology research and development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Research Council Canada Herzberg Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Centre (NRC/HAA) is one of a few astrophysics research centers in the world that embodies science, technology development, and data archiving and analysis across ultraviolet, optical, infrared, and radio wavelengths. Our research centre is involved in both short and long term instrumentation and observatory development projects. We conduct significant strategic R&D in-house and also in collaboration with external organizations. In order to guide our future research and development, we have implemented roadmaps that connect Canadian science strategic directions to current and future observing capabilities, and that identify needed technology development to achieve our goals. In this paper we present the process of developing these roadmaps, and describe the science and technology directions that we are pursuing as a result of this strategic planning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.012 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".