OpenML: Insights from 10 years and more than a thousand papers
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OpenML is an open-source platform that democratizes machine-learning evaluation by enabling anyone to share datasets in uniform standards, define precise machine-learning tasks, and automatically share detailed workflows and model evaluations. More than just a platform, OpenML fosters a collaborative ecosystem where scientists create new tools, launch initiatives, and establish standards to advance machine learning. Over the past decade, OpenML has inspired over 1,500 publications across diverse fields, from scientists releasing new datasets and benchmarking new models to educators teaching reproducible science. Looking back, we detail and describe the platform's impact by looking at usage and citations. We share lessons from a decade of building, maintaining, and expanding OpenML, highlighting how rich metadata, collaborative benchmarking, and open interfaces have enhanced research and interoperability. Looking ahead, we cover ongoing efforts to expand OpenML's capabilities and integrate with other platforms, informing a broader vision for open-science infrastructure for machine learning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it