MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6949715158 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.16082710

Recognizing Software as a Critical Component in Open Science: Advancing an Interoperable, Community-Driven Vision for Infrastructures

2025· article· en· W6949715158 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Council on Social Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftwareMetadataIdentifierComponent (thermodynamics)ExecutableSource codeSoftware developmentComponent-based software engineeringBest practiceSoftware construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software source code is crucial in Open Science, representing executable knowledge essential for advancing research. Yet, it often receives insufficient attention in open repositories for metadata management and archival strategies. This panel discussion will convene experts from various infrastructures who have crafted solutions tailored to the unique aspects of software as a digital object, including scholarly repositories, publisher platforms and aggregators. Representatives from HAL, Episciences, Dagstuhl, swMath and more will participate. We will discuss the archival of source code in Software Heritage, the universal source code archive, the application of the CodeMeta vocabulary for describing software and the use of the Software Hash Identifier (SWHID) for accurate referencing. Additionally, we will showcase how initiatives like European projects, such as FAIRCORE4EOSC, FAIR-IMPACT and EVERSE and collaborations with the SciCodes Consortium are creating vital connections between scholarly infrastructures. This panel will discuss both the advancements and the challenges faced, and will suggest practical steps that institutions, publishers, and researchers can take through collaboration, guided by a community-driven vision. We aim to deepen the understanding of software's role in research and its necessary recognition, encouraging wider adoption of best practices in academia to foster a more collaborative and inclusive scholarly environment.

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)0.117
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1170.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.045
Scholarly communication0.0480.075
Open science0.0060.051
Research integrity0.0200.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207