MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6943400956 · doi:10.15497/rda00073

Recommendations for a minimal metadata set to aid harmonised discovery of learning resources

2022· other· en· W6943400956 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataMeta Data ServicesSet (abstract data type)Metadata repositoryData elementResource (disambiguation)Metadata modelingGeospatial metadata

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the RDA Education And Training On Handling Of Research Data IG activities, the Minimal Metadata for Learning Resources Focus Group recommends a minimal set of metadata for learning resources. By comparing and analyzing existing learning resource-related metadata schemas to find the overlaps, the group provides guidance on metadata elements that should be minimally required for purposes of learning resource discovery to those concerned with supporting or providing training resources. This set includes a report, a list of minimal metadata elements along with a data dictionary with examples for how to use the elements, and supporting documents.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0170.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.018
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.023

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)French-language works237,207