MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281400275 · doi:10.3389/frwa.2022.870453

It Takes a Village: Using a Crowdsourced Approach to Investigate Organic Matter Composition in Global Rivers Through the Lens of Ecological Theory

2022· article· en· W4281400275 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

VenueFrontiers in Water · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersPacific Northwest National LaboratoryBiological and Environmental ResearchOffice of ScienceBattelleU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsGlobeData scienceLeverage (statistics)Computer scienceCitizen scienceEcologyPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though community-based scientific approaches are becoming more common, many scientific efforts are conducted by small groups of researchers that together develop a concept, analyze data, and interpret results that ultimately translate into a publication. Here, we present a community effort that breaks these traditional boundaries of the publication process by engaging the scientific community from initial hypothesis generation to final publication. We leverage community-generated data from the Worldwide Hydrobiogeochemistry Observation Network for Dynamic River Systems (WHONDRS) consortium to study organic matter composition through the lens of ecological theory. This community endeavor will use a suite of paired physical and chemical datasets collected from 97 river corridors across the globe. With our first step aimed at ideation, we engaged a community of scientists from over 20 countries and 60 institutions, spanning disciplines and career stages by holding a virtual workshop (April 2021). In the workshop, participants generated content for questions, hypotheses, and proposed analyses based on the WHONDRS dataset. These ideation efforts resulted in several narratives investigating different questions led by different teams, which will be the basis for research articles in a Frontiers in Water collection. Currently, the community is collectively analyzing, interpreting, and synthesizing these data that will result in six crowdsourced articles using a single, existing WHONDRS dataset. The use of a shared dataset across articles not only lowers barriers for broad participation by not requiring generation of new data, but also provides unique opportunities for emergent learning by connecting outcomes across studies. Here we will explain methods used to enable this community endeavor aimed to promote a greater diversity of thinking on river corridor biogeochemistry through crowdsourced science.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.185 · 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