MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

G20 Countries Status on Institutional Repositories in OpenDOAR: An Exploratory Study

2025· article· en· W4411531709 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dheeraj Singh Negi

Bibliographic record

VenueKIIT Journal of Library and Information Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchBusinessPolitical scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The G20 (Group of Twenty) consists of 19 countries and the European Union (EU). The 19 countries that are members of the G20.This Paper aims to examine the growth and development of G20 Countries status on Institutional Repositories available in OPENDOAR. The Data was collected from the Directory of OPENDOAR. The study finds that the USA with 926 (25%) number of repositories in OPEN DOAR leads the table followed by Japan with 627 (12%), United Kingdom with 0324, Turkey with 180, Indonesia with 174, Brazil with 170, France with 160, Italy with 143, India with 106, Canada with 100, Australia with 91, Argentina with 84, China 65, Maxico with 53, Russia with 50, South Africa 50. Taken together, a total of 3643 Contributions are found in OPEN DOAR of G20 countries. A total of 1006 repositories that use Dspace software belong to Argentina 46, Australia 21, Brazil 143, Canada 33, China 37, France 10, Germany 44 India 58, Indonesia 16, Italy 75, Japan 60, Mexico 33, Russia 33, Saudi Arabia 7, South Africa 32, Turkey 150, United Kingdom 50. The study is original work intended to examine the contributions of G20 countries in OPENDOAR.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKIIT Journal of Library and Information ManagementSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207