MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084757353 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17280233

The power of horizontal collaboration: an interoperable and open not-for-profit ecosystem for open access books

2025· article· en· W7084757353 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsMetadataInteroperabilityDirectoryContext (archaeology)WorkflowPublishingOpen dataThe InternetDiscoverability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the context of Open Science, book publishing has traditionally lagged behind in the adoption of open access, open data and corresponding practices. A number of not-for-profit infrastructures including the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB), OAPEN, Open Book Collective (OBC), Public Knowledge Project (PKP), and Thoth Open Metadata have joined forces to collaboratively develop open, community-led solutions to the many barriers faced by publishers when considering the creation, discovery, distribution, archiving and financing of open access books. PKP offers an open source book production and title management system, Open Monograph Press (OMP), which is now being integrated with both Thoth and DOAB/OAPEN to provide robust, free and open metadata management and dissemination workflows for books and chapters. Interoperability between the collaborating infrastructures means publishers can be supported (by Thoth and OAPEN) in the distribution and archiving of OA book content and metadata to a variety of channels (including Crossref, the Internet Archive and Portico); have their content and metadata hosted in internationally recognised discovery and hosting solutions (including DOAB and OAPEN); access privacy-respecting usage metrics across multiple platforms (via the OPERAS Metrics service and COKI); and in creating and managing collective funding channels for OA books via the Opening the Future programme, and OBC – two models supporting presses to transition away from a reliance on author-facing fees through collective funding, with OBC also providing collective funding for open infrastructure providers. All in all, this close collaboration between like-minded infrastructures – and with some of them (OAPEN & PKP) having existed for more than a decade – constitutes a collective, community-led open, equitable ecosystem of interoperable not-for-profit services and platforms that are jointly active in a variety of international networks and communities, including the Copim community, OPERAS, and the Barcelona Declaration group of signatories and supporters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0100.011
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
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 topicHistory of Computing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207