MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W43833945

Automating the Preservation of Electronic Theses and Dissertations with Archivematica

2013· article· en· W43833945 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowDigital preservationWorld Wide WebComputer scienceDigital librarySoftware engineeringLibrary scienceDatabase
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This poster describes the tools, services, and workflows that Simon Fraser University is using to automate the movement of its ETDs (Electronic Theses and Dissertations) from its user-facing Thesis Registration System to the Archivematica digital preservation platform. The poster also describes Simon Fraser University’s plans to expand its digital preservation services using Archivematica, including integration of LOCKSS as a distributed storage network for content managed by Archivematica.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.024

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207