MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197767073 · doi:10.1139/facets-2021-0031

Ensuring the success of data sharing in Canada

2021· article· en· W3197767073 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Moher, Kelly D. Cobey

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData sharingAuditAgency (philosophy)Research dataData managementFunding AgencyPublic relationsBusinessKnowledge managementPolitical scienceComputer scienceData scienceAccountingSociologyData curationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian federal Tri-Agency Research Data Management Policy has recently been released. This will require Canadian universities and other research institutes to create and share strategic plans regarding data management and to equip their researchers with skills to complete data deposits. To help maximize the success of data sharing we outline five domains for research institutions to consider during implementation: training and education, paying for data sharing, audit and feedback, meta-science, and career advancement.

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)0.147
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.214
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1470.214
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.018
Science and technology studies0.0350.011
Scholarly communication0.0300.010
Open science0.0080.018
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207