MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6893149199 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14751079

icepyx: Community and Software for the Open Science Journey

2024· article· en· W6893149199 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftwareSpace (punctuation)Software developmentPython (programming language)Open scienceSocial software engineeringSoftware peer reviewDomain (mathematical analysis)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Open science accelerates our ability to collaborate and produce quality, inclusive scientific results, making it essential for addressing the challenges of our time. Despite its collaborative nature and outcomes, any one person's path to doing science openly can be highly nonlinear and individualized. Many researchers are supportive of open science ideals like inclusivity, sharing data, collaborating on code, and reducing duplication of effort while increasing reproducibility. Yet these same researchers may lack the safe spaces, support, and technical training required to fully explore what it means to conduct their science openly and collaboratively. Most open-source software communities are truly welcoming, inclusive, and highly supportive of learning and growth, but it can still be intimidating for scientists to enter or remain in these technical spaces. Smaller communities and software packages that provide discipline-, instrument- and/or sensor-specific tooling can fill a critical gap by offering a more intimate space for facilitating open science practices, particularly among researchers who may have minimal formal software development training to accompany their domain expertise. The icepyx (pronounced ice-picks) community and Python software library aims to (1) provide technical software solutions to address shared challenges in NASA’s ICESat-2 data access and analysis pipeline; and (2) create a community and space for people to learn how to collaborate on software and foster the open sharing and co-working that readily takes place during in-person workshops but can be difficult to emulate in a virtual space. By providing a supportive, peer-led space for contributors to practice open, shared development throughout their project timelines, icepyx facilitates the long-term skill building and collaboration required to achieve the ideals of open science that make science accessible, time-efficient, and open for all. More Information Slides for a presentation (talk) in American Geophysical Union (AGU) 2024 Annual Meeting session U31C: Open Science Recognition Prize.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.019
Open science0.0050.036
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.034

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.126 · 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
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207