A Panarctic Biodiversity Data Warehouse For Benthic Biodiversity Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This talk was held at Arctic change conference 2017 in Quebec. It is about the lessens learned from developing the strategic foundations for the establishment of an panarctic information system on benthic biodiversity data geared towards arctic research, decision making, and conservation biology. Two main questions were in focus: first, how data management must be set up to handle both research in progress and outbound data services, and second, how an information systems must be set up to be useful to and taken up by users. Background is the need to overcome the existing technical debts in data management to enable modern data science and responsive stakeholder interaction as well as the observation that technical systems like information systems have a much higher likelihood of failure if they are not being developed in a user centered fashion. Products are an internal and an international workshop (in prep.) to raise awareness for these topics and feeding into a white paper (in prep.) laying out a roadmap to ensure usability and usefulness of future data warehousing solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".