MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241632110 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v4i2.1133

Population Data BC: Supporting population data science in British Columbia

2020· article· en· W4241632110 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tavinder K. Ark, Sarah Kesselring, Brent Hills, Kim McGrail

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsThe Quebec Population Health Research NetworkUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData accessLinkage (software)Variety (cybernetics)Data qualityIdentifierData scienceData managementLinked dataRecord linkagePopulationDatabaseWorld Wide WebService (business)Business

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundPopulation Data BC (PopData) was established as a multi-university data and education resourceto support training and education, data linkage, and access to individual level, de-identified data forresearch in a wide variety of areas including human and community development and well-being. ApproachA combination of deterministic and probabilistic linkage is conducted based on the quality andavailability of identifiers for data linkage. PopData utilizes a harmonized data request and approvalprocess for data stewards and researchers to increase efficiency and ease of access to linked data.Researchers access linked data through a secure research environment (SRE) that is equipped witha wide variety of tools for analysis. The SRE also allows for ongoing management and control ofdata. PopData continues to expand its data holdings and to evolve its services as well as governanceand data access process. DiscussionPopData has provided efficient and cost-effective access to linked data sets for research. After twodecades of learning, future planned developments for the organization include, but are not limitedto, policies to facilitate programs of research, access to reusable datasets, evaluation and use of newdata linkage techniques such as privacy preserving record linkage (PPRL). ConclusionPopData continues to maintain and grow the number and type of data holdings available for research.Its existing models support a number of large-scale research projects and demonstrate the benefitsof having a third-party data linkage and provisioning center for research purposes. Building furtherconnections with existing data holders and governing bodies will be important to ensure ongoingaccess to data and changes in policy exist to facilitate access for researchers.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.021
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.018

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 head0.413
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.108 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207