MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386995367 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16100421

Financial Sustainability of Digitizing Cultural Heritage: The International Platform Europeana

2023· article· en· W4386995367 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elena Borin, Fabio Donato

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigitizationCultural heritageSustainabilityEuropean unionVariety (cybernetics)BusinessFinancePolitical scienceComputer scienceTelecommunicationsEconomic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the increasing demand for digital cultural content has intensified the digitization challenges for cultural organizations. Among these difficulties, cultural organizations have been struggling to find the financial resources for digitizing their cultural heritage, as well as for storing data, developing digital skills, and implementing enhancement and management processes for their digitized materials. The financial sustainability of digitization projects has therefore been problematic, especially for small and medium organizations. In this framework, among its attempts to solve these issues, the European Union has launched the project Europeana, a digital platform uniting European digitized heritage and empowering cultural organizations through a variety of services. The aim of our research was to investigate the Europeana project to understand how it eases the financial costs of digitization for cultural organizations, and how the Europeana model could bring insights into how to improve the financial sustainability of digitization of cultural heritage.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207