MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400100886 · doi:10.29173/iq1084

Research Analysis: A World Data System and Canadian CoreTrustSeal Cohort Needs Assessment

2024· article· en· W4400100886 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIASSIST Quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of ScienceAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCohortData scienceGeographyMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From July 2022 to December 2022, the World Data System (WDS) International Technology (ITO) and International Program (IPO) Offices conducted a review of strategic plans and technical roadmaps of all current WDS members and the set of Canadian repositories that participated in the Digital Research Alliance of Canada's CoreTrustSeal Certification Support and Funding Pilot (Digital Research Alliance of Canada, 2022). In this paper, we describe how a new organizational assessment method was designed and utilized to identify the needs and challenges faced by the WDS and Canadian CTS Pilot members. Our method relied on reviewing public-facing documentation provided by the repositories, with a priority on strategic plans and technical road maps. In total, we reviewed 95 sources of information, including 33 strategic plans and 3 technical roadmaps describing a total of 95 out of the original 147 target organizations. In this paper, we also describe our assessment tool and the overarching challenges and goals we identified through the usage of this tool. Finally, we will describe the limitations of our methodology and provide recommendations from the World Data System on how best to assist the WDS members and the cohort of Canadian data repositories based on our findings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.308 · 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