Alliance Software Management Plan (SMP) Template
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
Software has become an essential part of modern research and is increasingly recognized as an important output of research. Despite years of wide adoption of Data Management Plans (DMPs) to ensure good data management practices are followed, in Canada there were currently no clear guidelines that instruct various stakeholders how to plan for a piece of software to be properly developed, maintained, shared, and reused. To address this gap, the Alliance launched the Alliance Software Management Plan (SMP) Template. A Software Management Plan (SMP) details how a software project is developed, maintained, and curated, ensuring long-term accessibility and usability. The SMP can help funders to encourage, support and promote software recognition and good practices (e.g., FAIR4RS), facilitate culture change and, support communities, ensuring consistent adherence to certain software management standards and policies. It can also support and upskill researchers to develop higher-quality software, which will likely be an important part of a researcher’s portfolio in the future.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.076 | 0.027 |
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