Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metadata is often created about marginalized communities by professionals unfamiliar with the issues and preferences of the communities involved and so work practices which appear to be neutral continue to enact harm. To counteract these problems, metadata best practices should be developed by representative communities. That is, those directly affected by exclusionary work practices. Example projects, which take up this challenge, include the Archives for Black Lives in Philadelphia, Protocols for Native American Archival Materials, the Chicano Studies Collection Thesaurus, and the Trans Metadata Collective (TMDC). Created in 2021, TMDC, the focus of this contribution, was created in 2021, with the goal of developing a series of best practices addressing the sizable gap in information resources for trans and gender diverse materials and the communities that data is derived from.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.029 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.020 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".