MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324277966 · doi:10.1177/20539517231163172

All WARC and no playback: The materialities of data-centered web archives research

2023· article· en· W4324277966 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

VenueBig Data & Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceStandardizationMetadataWorld Wide WebInteroperabilityData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the Web ARChive (WARC) file format, revealing how the format has come to play a central role in the development and standardization of interoperable tools and methods for the international web archiving community. In the context of emerging big data approaches, I consider the sociotechnical relationships between material construction of data and information infrastructures for collecting and research. Analysis is inspired by Star and Griesemer's historical case of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology which reveals how boundary objects and methods standardization are used to enroll actors in the work of collecting for natural history. I extend these concepts by pairing them with frameworks for studying digital materiality and the representational qualities of data artifacts. Through examples drawn from fieldwork observations studying two data-centered research projects, I consider how the materiality of the WARC format influences research methods and approaches to data extraction, selection, and transformation. Findings identify three modalities researchers use to configure WARC data for researcher needs: using indexes to support search queries, constructing derivative formats designed for certain types of analysis, and generating custom-designed datasets tailored for specific research purposes. Findings additionally reveal similarities in how these distinct methods approach automated data extraction by relying upon the WARC's standardized metadata elements. By interrogating whose information needs are being met and taken into account in the design of the WARC's underlying information representation, I reveal effects on the emerging field of web history, and consider alternative approaches to knowledge production with archived web data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0060.011
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 head0.456
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.059 · 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