Bibliographic record
Abstract
I am writing to you in your capacity as the manager/representative of an identifier system or project developed within ISO/TC 46/SC 9. This message is also being copied for information to other participants in the ISO-related portion of our February 2000 meeting on "Common Issues for Information Identifier Systems". Attached is a document from the Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) concerning their new "Multimedia Framework " project, known as MPEG-21. This document is a draft Technical Report that sets out the MPEG-21 vision and user requirements for "an environment that is capable of supporting the delivery and use of all content types by different categories or users in multiple application domains". The MPEG-21 initiative includes a project stream on "Digital Item Identification and Description " which is why I am contacting you. Sections 4.3 and 5.3 of the attached document relate specifically to identification and description issues but other sections (such as those on Intellectual Property Management and Protection) will also be of concern to your work. These sections of MPEG-21 are very closely related to the subject of the identifiers meeting we held in Paris this past February. They concern interoperability issues and the role of and requirements for identifier systems within the digital information and e-commerce environment. My question concerns whether and how the existing ISO identifier systems/projects (ISRC,
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.742 | 0.589 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".