MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data-Based Craft: How Data Scientists Craft Their Data, Models, and Products

2025· book-chapter· en· W4415159953 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicData Analysis and Archiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftWork (physics)Digital dataData collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we examine the work of data scientists, members of an emerging technical occupation, through the lens of craft. Drawing on 65 in-depth interviews with data scientists, we show that their work cannot be adequately explained by the human–machine configurations characterized in the existing literature on craft in technical occupations, which primarily focuses on crafting products using ready-to-use tools and ready-to-be-processed materials. Instead, we find that data scientists craft not only their products, but also their tools and materials, often in an iterative and non-linear fashion. This distinct approach entails a unique human–machine-data configuration that we refer to as data-based craft, which stems from the unique nature of digital data and learning algorithms that data scientists simultaneously craft and use. This study advances our understanding of craft in the digital age by highlighting the need to reconceptualize human–machine relationships in data-intensive occupations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0090.010
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.198
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.146 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Analysis and ArchivingFrench-language works237,207