Advancing replicable and reproducible GIScience: an approach with KNIME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reproducibility and replicability (R&R) crisis poses a significant challenge across disciplines, particularly in spatiotemporal studies. This paper focuses on the unique challenges within spatiotemporal research in the context of R&R, including data availability, methodological conception transparency, interdisciplinary collaboration complexities, the balance between R&R and innovation, and R&R education. Recognizing the potential of Scientific Workflow Management Systems (SWMS) to enhance R&R, we introduce a pioneering SWMS-based integrated spatiotemporal research approach (SISRA) utilizing KNIME, an open-source SWMS, to tackle these R&R challenges. First, we developed a set of KNIME extensions, including Geospatial and Dataverse extensions, to enhance spatiotemporal software availability in SWMS. Then we created spatial data virtual laboratory architecture to support multidisciplinary collaboration. Finally, we suggested a geographical research lifecycle that integrates SWMS-based methods to improve practices, efficiency, and innovation in R&R research and education. Our approach exemplifies how executable workflows can not only alleviate the R&R burden on researchers but also strengthen R&R education in geographical research, illustrating the benefits of our approach in training, teaching, and multidisciplinary collaboration.
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 | 0.022 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".