MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033508633

Reports on activities of RNODCs and World Data Centres

2008· other· en· W7033508633 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) · 2008
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian and Buddhist Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Work (physics)Host (biology)Information systemTerm (time)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regarding the former RNODCs Mr. Gelfeld recalled that IODE-XVIII had adopted Resolution\nIODE-XVIII.2 which had abolished the system of RNODCs, but had requested also that, where\navailable, NODCs participating in Ocean Data and Information Networks (ODIN) assume the\nfunctions of former RNODCs. In addition IODE-XVIII had instructed the IODE Chair to discuss with host institutions of other RNODCs how their operations, if considered essential for the international community, could be maintained and properly acknowledged, or transferred to other Centers of the IODE network. At their February 2006 meeting the Officers had requested the former RNODCs to document the products and services that were provided by the RNODCs and to incorporate these, as relevant, in the terms of reference of the relevant ODINs. The following exceptions had been identified: RNODC for drifting buoys (Canada), JASIN (UK: to be closed), IGOSS (Japan, USA and Russia), MARPOLMON (Japan, USA and Russia), ADCP (Japan). The Officers had requested the centers that hosted the former RNODCs for drifting buoys (Canada), IGOSS (Japan, USA and Russia), MARPOLMON (Japan, USA and Russia) and ADCP (Japan) to continue their work until the next Session of IODE

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.018

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)Same topicIndian and Buddhist StudiesFrench-language works237,207