MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209148155 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3906443

Institutional Research Data Management Services Capacity Survey INSIGHTS Report #1. RDM Support within Organizations: Budget, Structure, and Strategies

2020· report· en· W3209148155 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Abel, Alexandra Cooper, Dylanne Dearborn, Carol Perry, Andrea Szwajcer, Minglu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaYork UniversityUniversity of GuelphUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityPortage College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRDMBusinessData managementResearch dataSurvey data collectionProcess managementKnowledge managementComputer scienceData scienceData curationDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this report is to examine in greater detail the findings reported by the Portage Network’s Research Intelligence Expert Group’s Institutional Research Data Management Services Capacity Survey, as they relate to organizations and how they support RDM through budgets, collaborations, organizational structures and strategies.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.012

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.

Opus teacher head0.223
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207