MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metadata for Creators

2022· article· en· W4288685812 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBalisage series on markup technologies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNuclear PhysicsNational Institute of Information and Communications TechnologyJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyCanadian Space AgencyCenter for Long-Term Cybersecurity, University of California BerkeleyGeo-Informatics and Space Technology Development AgencyIran Telecommunication Research CenterEuropean Space AgencyAgenzia Spaziale ItalianaEuropean Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological SatellitesKorea Aerospace Research InstituteNational Commission for Science and TechnologyTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Space OrganizationChina National Space AdministrationBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeChinese Academy of SciencesU.S. Geological SurveyIndian Space Research OrganisationCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceMeta Data ServicesWorld Wide WebGeospatial metadataProcess (computing)Key (lock)Metadata repositoryData elementInformation retrievalComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metadata is generally viewed from a third-party perspective, standing aside from both the creator and the audience of a work. This paper looks at the problem from the creator's standpoint: metadata that is deeply intertwined with the process of creation. In additional to more conventional organization metadata, two other important classes of metadata stand out: signature metadata, which is for the creator of a work to claim authorship and communicate with their audience, and process metadata, which is to help the creator recover key details of the creation process for themselves to drive further creation. Some key techniques for capturing and embedding signature and process metadata are detailed for a particular use case are described, along with some lessons learned. It turns out that taking a metadata-first development approach can make is easier both to capture the metadata and implement and tweak the process itself.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.202 · 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