MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6968942965 · doi:10.5683/sp3/incmuk

Research Data Management Needs and Practices of Researchers in the Faculties of Engineering and Science at the University of Waterloo

2016· dataset· en· W6968942965 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2016
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScience and engineeringPoint (geometry)Order (exchange)Data managementResearch dataService science, management and engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2015, a survey which replicated the survey created and conducted at the University of Toronto, was distributed to faculty and post-doctoral fellows in the Faculties of Engineering and Science at the University of Waterloo in order that the Library become better prepared to support research data management (RDM) practices. The results of this survey can help inform possible services and infrastructure which could be offered by the Library as well as constitute a starting point for the Library to initiate conversations and/or partnerships with colleagues in the Office of Research and IST to help support Waterloo researchers.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.019
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designQualitative
DomainReproducibility
GenreDataset

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→