MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383175845 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.8107872

Data Remediation as Collaborative Process

2023· paratext· en· W4383175845 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kim Martin, Susan Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Computer scienceEnvironmental remediationProcess managementProcess engineeringEngineeringOperating systemContamination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper utilizes the concept of remediation (of research conceptualization, of data, and by interfaces) to describe the processes developed by Linked Infrastructure for Networked Cultural Scholarship (LINCS), a Canadian infrastructure project for mobilizing Canadian scholarship through the creation, dissemination, and use of linked open data (LOD).

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)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.152
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.152
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.028
Scholarly communication0.0210.031
Open science0.0080.027
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.152 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207