Hacktoberfest 2026：メンテナが10月に向けて印を付けた、オープンで初心者向けの issue。 Hacktoberfest の issue を見る

Decide whether report venue type (journal, preprint, conference, thesis) is recorded in the data

オープン
  • 何か問題がありますか？
#147 コメント 0 件 リアクション 0 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
5/5
見積もり時間
1週間以上
初心者へのやさしさ
20/100
issue の種類
機能追加
明瞭さ
説明が足りない
活発さ
活発
技術スタック
html
領域
data

調査の方向性

Start by reading the matching flora-explorer issue 40 and the proposal/preprint-venues branch mentioned in the issue. The open question is which venue types and publication rules to adopt, including who will curate unknowns; agree on those decisions before estimating an implementation. Done means the project has chosen an option and documented the vocabulary, rules, and ownership.

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

Raised by the FLoRA Explorer usability review of 21 October 2026. A matching issue is open in flora-explorer: https://github.com/forrtproject/flora-explorer/issues/40.

Question

Should a report's venue type (journal, repository/preprint, conference output, thesis, unknown) be recorded in the FLoRA/FReD data, or derived by each downstream tool?

The data currently has only free-text journal_r / journal_o, doi_r and url_r. FLoRA Explorer's Publication Type tab infers the venue type from keywords in journal_r. The inference gets a lot wrong:

  • Most preprints are classified as "Unknown venue". 284 replication pairs have no venue type. At least 238 of them have a repository DOI or URL:

    • osf.io URLs: 158
    • PsyArXiv DOIs: 41
    • OSF DOIs: 11
    • bioRxiv/medRxiv: 11
    • SSRN: 6
    • Research Square: 3
    • SocArXiv, Preprints.org, PeerJ Preprints, HAL: 7

    Only 39 pairs are recognised as preprints.

  • "Proceedings" is treated as a conference. This sends Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (25 pairs) and Academy of Management Proceedings (4) to "Conference output".

  • Venue names alone are ambiguous. 140 pairs with a named journal also have an OSF URL. A Zenodo deposit is recorded under a lab name ("Clearer Thinking"), and a PsychArchives deposit under "Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID)".

  • Later publication is ignored. A preprint that has since been published is still classified as a preprint.

Options

  1. Curated field in the data. Add venue_type_r (and possibly venue_type_o) with a fixed vocabulary, set at entry or validation. It is the most accurate option and serves every consumer the same way, but it needs coder time and a backfill.
  2. Derived field at ingestion. flora-validation computes venue_type_r from DOI prefix, URL host and venue name using shared, documented rules, and flags uncertain rows for curation. The rules are maintained once, and FLoRA Explorer simply reads the field.
  3. Leave it to each tool. This is the status quo. FLoRA Explorer would keep its own rules; branch proposal/preprint-venues in flora-explorer has a deterministic DOI/URL/name version with tests, which reduces Unknown from 284 to 46.

Option 2, with manual overrides, looks like the best balance. It needs agreement on:

  • the vocabulary: is "repository/preprint" one category, or are registrations and data deposits separate?
  • the rules for preprints that were later published: record the version actually linked, or the latest version?
  • who curates the remaining unknowns.
主要言語
HTML
スター
1
フォーク
0
30日以内にマージされた PR はありません

環境構築

このプロジェクトには開発コンテナ、Dockerfile、コントリビューションガイドがありません。まず README を読み、一般的な手順ははじめてのコントリビューションガイドを参照してください。

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

forrtproject/fred-data のほかの issue

forrtproject/fred-data の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Data Engineering の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。