Workshop Report: OCSDNet Imagining a Feminist Open Science
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
The Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet), funded by IDRC and DFID from 2014-2017, had the key objective of gathering evidence to better understand how and whether an open and collaborative approach to scientific knowledge production could contribute to development outcomes across a variety of social, economic and political contexts. As OCSDNet began to develop a more comprehensive framework of OCS, we came to realize that much of the groundwork looking at inclusive science practices and theory has been laid by other scholars in a variety of fields, especially feminist postcolonial technoscience scholars. With OCSDNet coming to a close in its current configuration, it was timely to bring a small subset of scholars and practitioners together to discuss what can be set in motion through situated feminist open science projects in diverse global contexts. The following report highlights the proceedings of the two-day workshop which took place from June 20-21 immediately preceding the Electronic Publishing (ELPub) conference held in Toronto, Canada.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Open scienceScience and technology studies Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | Open science Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
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