MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6968096553 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14832272

HeFDI Code School - Code Competencies for sustainable research software

2025· article· en· W6968096553 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)SoftwareProgram codeCode (set theory)Code reviewSet (abstract data type)Software development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HeFDI Code School - Code Competencies for sustainable research software The HeFDI Code School has been tested since 2023 to meet the high demand for competence development in programming scientific software. The Code School supports researchers, especially young scientists, in the development of high-quality research software - a central building block for reproducible science. The program has so far been carried out with changing partners such as SURESOFT /TU Braunschweig, NFDI4ING, NFDI4EARTH and the Hessian Competence Center for High Performance Computing (HKHLR). Cooperation with proven experts on the one hand and with NFDI consortia on the other is particularly important to ensure the effective dissemination of the offering and, at the same time, to utilize existing skills and resources as efficiently as possible. Demand remains high: the online courses in particular reach well over 100 participants per course in a very short space of time. The high demand for the basic track, which has only been offered once so far, shows that it would be desirable to set up a graduated program that systematically guides those interested from basic skills through an intermediate level to “Advanced” and “Expert” with the best support. The unbroken high demand underlines the fact that such a format is also needed throughout Germany. However, many questions remain unanswered, such as the need for a finely tuned overall program in terms of content, long-term cooperation with consortia and/or other initiatives, as well as certificates or other proof of performance and the verification of skills development. On the one hand, the poster aims to present the experiences and the program to date. On the other hand, it is intended to get into conversation with other interested parties in order to explore future collaborative perspectives and synergy opportunities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.009

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.224 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207