MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6930829662 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15399868

Envisioning the Future of Research: 10 changes for Open Research

2025· preprint· en· W6930829662 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsHyperion Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Open researchSocial research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores imaginative and pragmatic responses to the question: What should the future of research look like? Rather than focusing exclusively on technological fixes, it advocates for new social conventions, institutional forms, and collaborative practices. Ten interlinked themes guide the exploration. Drawing on speculative fiction as well as real-world initiatives, the paper invites readers to envision and build a more inclusive, transparent, and imaginative research ecosystem.

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)0.175
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1750.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0180.151
Scholarly communication0.0640.119
Open science0.0060.028
Research integrity0.0210.030
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainEvaluation
GenreCommentary

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207