MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386201130 · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giad068

The founding charter of the Omic Biodiversity Observation Network (Omic BON)

2022· article· en· W4386201130 on OpenAlexaff
R.M. Meyer, Neil Davies, Kathleen Pitz, Chris Meyer, Robyn M. Samuel, Jane Anderson, Ward Appeltans, Katharine Barker, Francisco P. Chávez, J. Emmett Duffy, Kelly D. Goodwin, Māui Hudson, Margaret E. Hunter, Johannes Karstensen, Christine Laney, Margaret Leinen, Paula Mabee, James Macklin, Frank Müller‐Karger, Nicolas Pade, Jay Pearlman, Lori A. Phillips, Pieter Provoost, Ioulia Santi, Dmitry Schigel, Lynn M. Schriml, Alice Soccodato, Saara Suominen, Katherine M. Thibault, Visotheary Ung, Jodie van de Kamp, Elycia Wallis, Ramona Walls, Pier Luigi Buttigieg

Bibliographic record

VenueGigaScience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean CommissionBattelleNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOmicsCharterBiodiversityThematic mapData scienceGeographyBiologyComputer scienceEcologyBioinformaticsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Omic BON is a thematic Biodiversity Observation Network under the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON), focused on coordinating the observation of biomolecules in organisms and the environment. Our founding partners include representatives from national, regional, and global observing systems; standards organizations; and data and sample management infrastructures. By coordinating observing strategies, methods, and data flows, Omic BON will facilitate the co-creation of a global omics meta-observatory to generate actionable knowledge. Here, we present key elements of Omic BON's founding charter and first activities.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.012

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGigaScienceSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207