MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407222773 · doi:10.14293/apmc13-2025-0075

A Cloud-Based National Resource for FAIR Microscopy Research Data Management, Analysis and Sharing in Canada

2025· article· en· W4407222773 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Thomas Stroh, Stephen C. Ogg, Judith Lacoste, Claire M. Brown, Caterina Strambio‐De‐Castillia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaMolson Foundation
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceResource management (computing)Data sharingData scienceDistributed computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced light microscopy is used globally as an essential tool for recording quantitative measurements of biological structure, function and/or dynamics in the life and biomedical sciences. Its increasing use in fundamental research generates substantial and ever increasing, amounts of image data from diverse imaging modalities. The sheer volume of image data and the speed at which it is generated presents a major data management and storage challenge. This is especially true for individual laboratories that typically do not have the hardware infrastructure or domain knowledge to implement an effective image-data-management strategy by themselves. At the same time, effective curation, management and storage of image data and associated metadata are crucial to the success of the research enterprise and for fulfilling the Research Data Management (RDM) mandates of public funding bodies worldwide. Any proposed data management and storage solution should follow the FAIR – Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable [ 1] principles. To that end, open access tools and software that embed data management technologies as an integral part of ongoing research projects, rather than as an afterthought, are pivotal. Therefore, we have deployed an implementation of an existing open-source tool [ 2] to enable researchers that generate image data by facilitating the management of these data. The system was developed by the Open Microscopy Environment (OME) consortium and is called OME’s Remote Objects (OMERO) [ 3]. It is a platform for managing images in a secure central repository where data can be viewed, organized, analyzed and shared [ 3]. OMERO is the most popular RDM system for microscopy image data [ 4] with 1000+ production instances of OMERO worldwide [ 5].

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.022

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207