MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7018208825

Consultation on Access to Scientific Research Data Presentation: Coalition for Networked Information, Fall 2005 Task Force Meeting,

2005· other· en· W7018208825 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaStrong
KeywordsTask forceTask (project management)Research councilData sharingValue (mathematics)Research ethicsWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An examination of the results of the National (Canada) Consultation on Access to Scientific Research Data (NCASRD). This consultation examined the issues around the management of publicly funded research data, in particular their long-term preservation and open access. It was concerned with “maximizing the value” returned from these data. The NCASRD report, created by leading Canadian researchers in science, engineering and health at the two day NCASRD forum in November 2004, includes a national strategy, as well as recommendations and guidelines to yield the most value from Canada’s scientific research data by making them more widely available.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0190.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.025

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→