MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Top Popular Python Libraries in Research

2022· preprint· en· W4214750646 on OpenAlex

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

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)Computer scienceProgramming languageWorld Wide WebObject-oriented programming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Python is one of the most popular programming languages in research. The structure of the language and its object-oriented approach help programmers to write logical and clear code for small and large projects. Python libraries (packages) effectively simplify many important processes such as analysing and visualizing data, retrieving unstructured data from the web, image processing, building machine learning models, and textual information [1-4]. In this article, some of the most important and popular libraries and packages in Python are described. 1-Pandas Pandas is a fast, powerful, flexible, and easy-to-use open source data analysis and manipulation tool built on the Python programming language. Pandas is being used for data wrangling and analysis and provides simple ways for cleaning, manipulating, and transforming data. If you are dealing with a large amount of data, Pandas make it easier to work with them. Top features in Pandas can be categorized as:

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.007
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.253 · 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