Reconciling open science practices and research assessment requirements in the process of establishing a national CRIS system in Serbia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open science promotes transparency, open access, and reproducibility in research, ensuring that research outputs are openly available and reusable by others. However, traditional research assessment systems usually emphasize quantitative indicators, such as journal impact factors and citation counts, encouraging publication in ‘high-prestige’ journals and failing to fully capture the value of open science practices. Accordingly, a Current Research Information System (CRIS) tracking research outputs for assessment purposes does not necessarily encourage open science practices. This presentation explores the challenges and strategies involved in reconciling open science practices with research assessment requirements in Serbia during the process of establishing the national CRIS system eNauka.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.050 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it