Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 175 references

Opening the Scope of Openness in AI

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a two-dimensional taxonomy of openness built from 98 cross-disciplinary concepts shows AI openness emphasizes access, inspectability, reuse, organic freedom, and democratization while omitting non-isolation…

desk verdict The taxonomy is a solid instrument; the claim about what AI openness misses is a reasoned reading, not a measured result. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06464 v1 pith:FEHCYFAU submitted 2025-05-09 cs.AI

Tamara Paris , AJung Moon , Jin Guo This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AI
keywords artificialintelligenceopennessopensourcetaxonomytopicmodelinglatentdirichletallocationinterdisciplinarityresponsibleAI
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that 'openness' in AI has been defined almost entirely through open source software, which narrows what counts as open. To broaden that scope, it builds a taxonomy of openness from 98 concepts drawn from 224,123 abstracts across disciplines, organized by two dimensions: themes (Interactivity, Freedom, Inclusiveness) and approaches to definition (properties, afforded actions, desired effects). It then uses the taxonomy to show that current AI openness discussions center on access, inspectability, reuse, organic freedom, and democratization, while largely ignoring non-isolation, autonomy, fairness, and diversity. If the taxonomy is right, AI openness conversations are missing several dimensions that other fields treat as central.

What carries the argument

The central object is the taxonomy of openness, built from 98 concepts extracted by LDA topic modeling of 224,123 English abstracts with 'open' or 'openness' in the title, then analyzed through reflexive thematic analysis. The taxonomy has two dimensions: themes (Interactivity, Freedom, Inclusiveness) and approaches to defining openness (properties, afforded actions, desired effects). It works as an instrument for situating current AI openness discussions and for identifying which parts of the broader openness landscape are missing.

What would settle it

Run the same topic-modeling pipeline on a corpus that adds non-English abstracts, full texts, or a relaxed title filter; if concepts such as labor openness or epistemic openness appear that fit no existing sub-theme, the taxonomy's completeness—and the claim that AI openness omits certain dimensions—would be an artifact of the corpus.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that openness is not a single concept but a family of related ideas that can be organized by what is opened and how openness is defined. Across 98 concepts, three themes emerge—Interactivity (access, inspectability, distribution, reuse, collaboration), Freedom (no obstacle, organic, non-isolation, broader boundary, undetermined, autonomy), and Inclusiveness (fairness, diversity, democratization)—and definitions work through intrinsic properties, afforded actions, or desired effects. Situating AI openness within this taxonomy, the paper finds that AI discussions emphasize access, inspectability, reuse, organic, and democratization, but do not represent non-isolation, autonomy, fairness, and diversity. The authors conclude that current AI openness frameworks, including the Open Source AI Definition and the Model Openness Framework, are therefore narrower than the broader concept of openness.

Load-bearing premise

The whole exercise depends on the 98 concepts that topic modeling happened to surface from a corpus limited to English-language article titles containing 'open' or 'openness'; if that pipeline missed concepts, the gaps found in AI openness may be artifacts of the corpus rather than real omissions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • AI openness definitions that list only afforded actions (access, modify, share) omit objective properties and ethical effects, so they cannot by themselves guarantee transparency or democratization.
  • Concepts like fairness and diversity are treated as consequences of AI openness rather than as defining principles, unlike in education and other fields.
  • Non-isolation—the involuntary permeability and leakage risks of open systems—is largely absent from AI openness discussions despite being a real security concern.
  • Autonomy, the freedom to act without permission, is only partially represented in AI openness through the ability to download and copy components.
  • Opening at the level of AI systems does not automatically open the AI field; field-level properties may need to be enforced separately.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the taxonomy were treated as an audit checklist, open-washing criticisms could be restated as missing dimensions such as fairness or autonomy rather than as loose rhetoric.
  • The taxonomy implies a measurable research program: mapping existing AI frameworks onto the two dimensions could produce a profile per framework, making the claim about gaps testable.
  • Because the corpus is limited to English-language academic abstracts with 'open' or 'openness' in the title, popular or practitioner notions of openness might not fit the taxonomy; extending the method to non-academic sources could reveal additional sub-themes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a taxonomy of openness derived from a large multidisciplinary literature corpus (224,123 English abstracts, 1980–2024, with “open|openness” in the title), using LDA topic modeling to identify 98 openness concepts and reflexive thematic analysis to organize them along two dimensions: three themes (Interactivity, Freedom, Inclusiveness) and three definitional approaches (properties, afforded actions, desired effects). It then uses this taxonomy as an instrument to situate the current AI openness discourse, concluding that AI openness emphasizes access, inspectability, reuse, organicity, and democratization while under-representing non-isolation, autonomy, fairness, and diversity. The paper recommends defining AI openness through all three approaches and considering openness at multiple scales beyond the model.

Significance. The strengths of the paper are its scale and transparency: the corpus construction is described in detail, the topic-modeling pipeline and hyperparameter choices are documented, the appendix lists all topics with stability scores and associated concepts, and the qualitative analysis follows an established method. If the taxonomy is accepted, it provides a genuinely interdisciplinary instrument for AI openness discussions and could support future empirical work on open-washing, licensing design, and AI governance. The paper also makes a falsifiable diagnostic claim about which openness dimensions are missing from AI discourse. However, the central diagnostic claim is currently under-supported, so the significance of the contribution depends on whether that claim can be made reproducible.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, first paragraph] The opening claim that openness in AI “does not represent” non-isolation, autonomy, fairness, and diversity is not consistent with the paper's own earlier sections. Section 4.2.6 explicitly states that the OSI Open Source AI Definition “increases developers' autonomy” by allowing reuse without permission, and Section 4.3.1 states that inspectability enabled by openness “improves the fairness of the models” and that openness “facilitates the redistribution of access” to help close inequality gaps. Unless “represent” is given a precise technical meaning, such as “specified as a required property in a definition,” the conclusion as written is contradicted by the manuscript's own evidence. The distinction between a concept being a side effect of openness and being a core definitional principle is essential to the claim but is never operationalized.
  2. [Sections 4.1–4.3, “X in AI Openness” paragraphs] The diagnosis of gaps in AI openness is not derived from the systematic topic-modeling pipeline; it comes from narrative paragraphs that cite selected AI openness literature. No corpus of AI openness texts is defined for this phase, no inclusion criteria are given for the cited works, and no coding scheme is specified that would allow a reader to decide when a sub-theme is “represented” versus merely mentioned. The limitations in Section 5.3 address completeness of the concept-extraction phase but not the reliability of the AI-situating phase. As a result, the central claim that AI openness misses autonomy, fairness, and diversity is not demonstrably reproducible, even though it may be true.
  3. [Section 5.1] The recommendation to define AI openness through properties, afforded actions, and desired effects is interesting but is presented without a concrete test of its applicability. For example, the paper recommends “being accompanied by a model card” as an objectively verifiable property, yet Section 4.1.2 notes that documentation does not always translate to auditability. The authors should clarify how their three-approach framework handles trade-offs between verifiability and ethical objectives, or at least acknowledge that the recommendation is a design proposal rather than an empirically validated outcome.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1.5] There is a typo: “communities whith peer-recognition” should read “communities with peer-recognition.”
  2. [Section 4.3.1] The sentence “For example, access to open source software [108], open educational resources, and [160]open standards should be non-discriminatory” has misplaced citation punctuation; it should read “open educational resources [160] and open standards.”
  3. [Appendix A.3, Tables 5–7] Several table entries contain typos: “open mindness,” “open educational ressources,” “Massive Open Online Couse,” “open univeristy,” and “open-door laminopy” (likely “laminoplasty”). These should be corrected.
  4. [Section 3.1] The title-based filter “open|openness” excludes concepts such as “openwashing” or uses of “open” only in the abstract; this is acknowledged in Section 5.3, but a brief sentence in Section 3.1 noting the intended scope would help readers assess coverage.
  5. [Section 4.1.1] The distinction between “availability” and “accessibility” is valuable but is illustrated with only a few examples; Table 1 lists many concepts without indicating which ones demonstrate the distinction. A footnote or table column clarifying this contrast would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the taxonomy is externally derived, and the AI-situating step is interpretive rather than forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's central instrument is built from 98 openness concepts discovered via topic modeling of 224,123 abstracts drawn from multidisciplinary literature, with formal definitions retrieved from Google Scholar; these concepts are external to the AI-openness discourse that the taxonomy is later used to examine. The taxonomy's themes (Interactivity, Freedom, Inclusiveness) and definitional approaches (properties, afforded actions, desired effects) are therefore not defined in terms of the AI-openness claims being evaluated. The subsequent finding that AI openness emphasizes access, inspectability, reuse, organic, and democratization while not representing non-isolation, autonomy, fairness, and diversity (Section 5) is an interpretive application of the taxonomy to AI literature, not a mathematical or statistical consequence of the taxonomy's construction. No parameter is fitted to the AI-openness subset and then reported as a prediction, and the gap claim is not derived from the LDA pipeline. The only self-citation identified is reference [130] (Shelby et al., with Moon as coauthor), used in Section 4.1.4 as background support for harms of model reuse; it is not load-bearing for the taxonomy or for the gap analysis. The skeptic's objection about the lack of coding rules or inter-rater reliability for the AI-situating phase is a reproducibility and validity concern about an interpretive step, not circularity: the conclusion does not reduce to the inputs by definition. The authors' own limitation statement in Section 5.3 acknowledges non-exhaustiveness of the concept-extraction phase, which further confirms that the taxonomy is presented as one externally grounded lens rather than as a tautology. No circular step can be exhibited with a specific reduction, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The taxonomy's themes and sub-themes are analytical constructs rather than newly postulated physical or ontological entities; they do not make falsifiable predictions of the kind the invented_entities field targets.

free parameters (6)
  • Number of LDA topics (k) = 80
    Chosen by iterative evaluation between 10 and 200 to balance topic separation and redundancy; directly determines which concepts are discovered.
  • Topic stability threshold = 0.63
    Topics with stability below 0.63 were excluded from analysis (Appendix A.3); changes which concepts enter the taxonomy.
  • Doc-topic prior alpha = 0.1/k
    Selected from range 0.01/k to 10/k after manual evaluation; influences topic granularity.
  • Topic-word prior eta = 0.1
    Selected from range 0.001 to 5; influences topic vocabulary concentration.
  • Minimum n-gram frequency = 30
    N-grams appearing fewer than 30 times were removed from the corpus; affects which concepts are visible.
  • Minimum abstract length = 200 characters
    Abstracts shorter than 200 characters were removed; affects corpus composition.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption English-language abstracts with 'open|openness' in the title are representative of openness concepts across disciplines.
    The entire concept discovery pipeline rests on this representativeness; acknowledged as a limitation in Section 5.3.
  • domain assumption Google Scholar definitions retrieved with definition-signal phrases accurately reflect the meaning of each openness concept in the source abstracts.
    Definitions are manually checked against abstracts, but search results are not fully documented; Section 3.3.
  • domain assumption LDA topics correspond to meaningful semantic categories of openness.
    Topic modeling is a statistical tool; coherence/stability were computed but the final topic set was selected via manual evaluation (Section 3.2, Appendix A.1).
  • domain assumption Reflexive thematic analysis by the authors yields reproducible themes.
    Braun and Clarke's method is standard, but coding is subjective; two rounds of analysis and validation among authors do not guarantee external reproducibility.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Opening the Scope of Openness in AI." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FEHCYFAU

@misc{pith2026250506464,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Opening the Scope of Openness in AI},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FEHCYFAU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06464}
}
read the original abstract

The concept of openness in AI has so far been heavily inspired by the definition and community practice of open source software. This positions openness in AI as having positive connotations; it introduces assumptions of certain advantages, such as collaborative innovation and transparency. However, the practices and benefits of open source software are not fully transferable to AI, which has its own challenges. Framing a notion of openness tailored to AI is crucial to addressing its growing societal implications, risks, and capabilities. We argue that considering the fundamental scope of openness in different disciplines will broaden discussions, introduce important perspectives, and reflect on what openness in AI should mean. Toward this goal, we qualitatively analyze 98 concepts of openness discovered from topic modeling, through which we develop a taxonomy of openness. Using this taxonomy as an instrument, we situate the current discussion on AI openness, identify gaps and highlight links with other disciplines. Our work contributes to the recent efforts in framing openness in AI by reflecting principles and practices of openness beyond open source software and calls for a more holistic view of openness in terms of actions, system properties, and ethical objectives.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.06464 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the taxonomy of openness, consisting of two dimensions: the themes of openness and the approaches to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Summary of the method used to derive the taxonomy of openness. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

175 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Open-Sourcing Highly Capable Foundation Models: An evaluation of risks, benefits, and alternative methods for pursuing open-source objectives. ([n. d.]). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.09227 arXiv:2311.09227 Opening the Scope of Openness in AI FAccT ’25, June 23–26, 2025, Athens, Greece

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.09227

  2. [2]

    Jane-frances Agbu, Fred Mulder, Fred de Vries, Vincent Tenebe, and Abel Caine

  3. [3]

    Richardson

    Farooq Ahmad and Michael K. Richardson. 2013. Exploratory behaviour in the open field test adapted for larval zebrafish: Impact of environmental complexity. Behavioural Processes92 (Jan. 2013), 88–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc. 2012.10.014

    work page doi:10.1016/j.beproc 2013

  4. [4]

    Meta AI. 2023. Llama 2 Community License Agreement. https://ai.meta.com/ llama-project/license

    2023

  5. [5]

    Christopher Akiki, Giada Pistilli, Margot Mieskes, Matthias Gallé, Thomas Wolf, Suzana Ilić, and Yacine Jernite. 2022. BigScience: A Case Study in the Social Construction of a Multilingual Large Language Model. (Dec. 2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.04960 arXiv:2212.04960

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.04960 2022

  6. [6]

    Mahsa Baktashmotlagh, Masoud Faraki, Tom Drummond, and Mathieu Salz- mann. 2018. Learning Factorized Representations for Open-set Domain Adapta- tion. (May 2018). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1805.12277 arXiv:1805.12277

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1805.12277 2018

  7. [8]

    Paul Barker. 2024. The Open Source AI Definition is not fit for pur- pose. https://pbarker.dev/posts/2024-10-15/the-open-source-ai-definition-is- not-fit-for-purpose/

    2024

  8. [9]

    Adrien Basdevant, Camille François, Victor Storchan, Kevin Bankston, Ayah Bdeir, Brian Behlendorf, Merouane Debbah, Sayash Kapoor, Yann LeCun, Mark Surman, Helen King-Turvey, Nathan Lambert, Stefano Maffulli, Nik Marda, Govind Shivkumar, and Justine Tunney. 2024. Towards a Framework for Open- ness in Foundation Models: Proceedings from the Columbia Conven...

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.15802 2024

Show all 175 references
  1. [10]

    2019.Health Technol- ogy Assessment in Abdominal Wall Surgery

    Valentina Beretta, Michele Tringali, and Antonio Marioni. 2019.Health Technol- ogy Assessment in Abdominal Wall Surgery. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02426-0_17

    2019 doi

  2. [11]

    Bertram, Josefin Sundin, Dominique G

    Michael G. Bertram, Josefin Sundin, Dominique G. Roche, Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar, Eli S. J. Thoré, and Tomas Brodin. 2023. Open science.Current Biology33, 15 (Aug. 2023), R792–R797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2023.05.036

    2023 doi

  3. [12]

    Damián Blasi, Antonios Anastasopoulos, and Graham Neubig. 2021. Systematic Inequalities in Language Technology Performance across the World’s Languages. (Oct. 2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2110.06733 arXiv:2110.06733

    2021 doi arXiv

  4. [13]

    Carl S Blyth. 2013. Open Educational Resources (OER).The Encyclopaedia of Applied Linguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing. A vailable at: https://doi. org/10.1002/9781405198431. wbeal1420(2013)

    2013 doi

  5. [14]

    Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S

    Rishi Bommasani, Drew A. Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S. Bernstein, Jeannette Bohg, Antoine Bosselut, Emma Brunskill, Erik Brynjolfsson, Shyamal Buch, Dallas Card, Rodrigo Castellon, Niladri Chatterji, Annie Chen, Kathleen Creel, Jare...

    2021 doi arXiv

  6. [15]

    Ho, Arvind Narayanan, and Percy Liang

    Rishi Bommasani, Sayash Kapoor, Kevin Klyman, Shayne Longpre, Ashwin Ramaswami, Daniel Zhang, Marietje Schaake, Daniel E. Ho, Arvind Narayanan, and Percy Liang. 2024. Considerations for governing open foundation models. Science386, 6718 (Oct. 2024), 151–153. https://doi.org/10...

    2024 doi

  7. [16]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3, 2 (Jan. 2006), 77–101. https://doi.org/10. 1191/1478088706qp063oa

    2006

  8. [17]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2019. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis.Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health11, 4 (Aug. 2019), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

    2019

  9. [18]

    Joe Brockmeier. 2024. OSI readies controversial Open AI definition. https: //lwn.net/Articles/995159/

    2024

  10. [19]

    Daniel Burgos and Affouneh Saïda. 2022. Open Education and Open Science in contexts of crises.Education Ouverte et Libre - Open Education11 (Aug. 2022). https://doi.org/10.52612/journals/eol-oe.2022.e750

    2022 doi

  11. [20]

    Sandeep Buttan, Ben Gascoyne, Sudeep Das, and Elena Schmidt. 2022. Piloting targeted glaucoma screening: experiences of eye care services in Ganjam district, Odisha state, India.International Health14 (April 2022). https://doi.org/10. 1093/inthealth/ihab078

    2022

  12. [21]

    Isabelle Böhm and Samuel Lolagar. 2021. Open source intelligence.International Cybersecurity Law Review2, 2 (Dec. 2021), 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1365/ s43439-021-00042-7

    2021

  13. [22]

    Nur Budhi Cahyani, Widia Winata, and Happy Indira Dewi. 2020. Open-Ended Game with Visual Art to Develop Creativity Culture in Early Childhood. In2nd International Conference on Arts and Design Education (ICADE 2019). Atlantis Press, 42–45. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200321.011

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    Feder Cooper, Katherine Lee, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr, Arthur Conmy, Itay Yona, Eric Wallace, David Rolnick, and Florian Tramèr

    Nicholas Carlini, Daniel Paleka, Krishnamurthy Dj Dvijotham, Thomas Steinke, Jonathan Hayase, A. Feder Cooper, Katherine Lee, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr, Arthur Conmy, Itay Yona, Eric Wallace, David Rolnick, and Florian Tramèr

  15. [24]

    Arezoo Aghaei Chadegani, Hadi Salehi, Melor Md Yunus, Hadi Farhadi, Ma- sood Fooladi, Maryam Farhadi, and Nader Ale Ebrahim. 2013. A Compar- ison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases.Asian Social Science9, 5 (April 2013), p18. h...

    2013 doi

  16. [25]

    Chakraborty

    Bhaswat S. Chakraborty. 2011. Clinical trials of antihypertensives: Nature of control and design.Indian Journal of Pharmacology43, 1 (Feb. 2011), 13. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.75659

    2011

  17. [26]

    Alan Chan, Ben Bucknall, Herbie Bradley, and David Krueger. 2023. Hazards from Increasingly Accessible Fine-Tuning of Downloadable Foundation Models. (Dec. 2023). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.14751 arXiv:2312.14751

    2023 doi arXiv

  18. [27]

    Leslie Chan, Darius Cuplinskas, Michael Eisen, Fred Friend, Yana Genova, Jean-Claude Guédon, Melissa Hagemann, Stevan Harnad, Rick Johnson, Rima Kupryte, Manfredi La Manna, István Rév, Monika Segbert, Sidnei de Souza, Peter Suber, and Jan Velterop. 2002. Budapest Open Access I...

    2002

  19. [28]

    2020.Open Banking: does it open up a new way of banking? A case of financial technology adoption from a consumer’s perspective

    Rebecca Sze Oi Chan. 2020.Open Banking: does it open up a new way of banking? A case of financial technology adoption from a consumer’s perspective. Thesis. University of Adelaide. http://hdl.handle.net/2440/128127

    2020

  20. [29]

    Gang Chen, Xun Zhu, Qiang Liao, Rong Chen, Dingding Ye, Ming Liu, and Kun Wang. 2021. A novel structured foam microreactor with controllable gas and liquid flow paths: Hydrodynamics and nitrobenzene conversion.Chemical Engineering Science229 (Jan. 2021), 116004. https://doi.or...

    2021 doi

  21. [30]

    Fan, Ming-Syuan Ho, and Kalpana Tyagi

    Tyng-Ruey Chuang, Rebecca C. Fan, Ming-Syuan Ho, and Kalpana Tyagi. 2022. Openness.Internet Policy Review11, 1 (2022), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.14763/ 2022.1.1643

    2022

  22. [31]

    Monica Condruz-Bacescu. 2019. Open educational resources or the future of education.Synergy15, 1 (2019), 140–151

    2019

  23. [32]

    Danish Contractor, Daniel McDuff, Julia Katherine Haines, Jenny Lee, Christo- pher Hines, Brent Hecht, Nicholas Vincent, and Hanlin Li. 2022. Behavioral Use Licensing for Responsible AI. InProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FA...

    2022 doi

  24. [33]

    Catherine Cronin and Iain MacLaren. 2018. Conceptualising OEP: A review of theoretical and empirical literature in Open Educational Practices.Open praxis 10, 2 (2018), 127–143

    2018

  25. [34]

    Heidrun Demo, Marzia Garzetti, George Santi, and Giulia Tarini. 2021. Learn- ing Mathematics in an Inclusive and Open Environment: An Interdisciplinary Approach.Education Sciences11, 55 (May 2021), 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci11050199

    2021

  26. [35]

    Barbara Dietel, Odran Sourdeval, and Corinna Hoose. 2024. Characterisation of low-base and mid-base clouds and their thermodynamic phase over the Southern Ocean and Arctic marine regions.Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics24, 12 (June 2024), 7359–7383. https://doi.org/10.5194/ac...

    2024 doi

  27. [36]

    Wigas Digwijaya, Handrea Bernando Tambunan, and Ariyana Dwiputra Nu- graha. 2023. Power Enhancement Analysis from Exhaust Energy Flow of An Open Cycle Gas Turbine Power Plant. In2023 4th International Confer- ence on High Voltage Engineering and Power Systems (ICHVEPS). 539–54...

    2023

  28. [37]

    Jennifer Ding, Christopher Akiki, Yacine Jernite, Anne Lee Steele, and Temi Popo. 2023. Towards Openness Beyond Open Access: User Journeys through 3 Open AI Collaboratives. (Jan. 2023). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.08488 arXiv:2301.08488 FAccT ’25, June 23–26, 2025, Ath...

    2023 doi arXiv

  29. [38]

    Justyna Dąbrowska, Irina Fiegenbaum, and Antero Kutvonen. 2013. Mapping the perception and reality of open innovation.International Journal of In- novation Management17, 06 (Dec. 2013), 1340016. https://doi.org/10.1142/ S1363919613400161

    2013

  30. [39]

    Javid Ebrahimi, Anyi Rao, Daniel Lowd, and Dejing Dou. 2018. HotFlip: White- Box Adversarial Examples for Text Classification. (May 2018). https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.1712.06751 arXiv:1712.06751

    2018 doi arXiv

  31. [40]

    Adrien Ecoffet, Jeff Clune, and Joel Lehman. 2020. Open Questions in Creating Safe Open-ended AI: Tensions Between Control and Creativity. InThe 2020 Conference on Artificial Life. MIT Press, Online, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1162/ isal_a_00323

    2020

  32. [41]

    Francisco Eiras, Aleksandar Petrov, Bertie Vidgen, Christian Schroeder, Fabio Pizzati, Katherine Elkins, Supratik Mukhopadhyay, Adel Bibi, Aaron Purewal, Csaba Botos, Fabro Steibel, Fazel Keshtkar, Fazl Barez, Genevieve Smith, Gian- luca Guadagni, Jon Chun, Jordi Cabot, Joseph...

    2024 doi arXiv

  33. [42]

    Nolazco-Flores, Lori Landay, Matthew Jackson, Paul Röttger, Philip H

    Francisco Eiras, Aleksandar Petrov, Bertie Vidgen, Christian Schroeder de Witt, Fabio Pizzati, Katherine Elkins, Supratik Mukhopadhyay, Adel Bibi, Botos Csaba, Fabro Steibel, Fazl Barez, Genevieve Smith, Gianluca Guadagni, Jon Chun, Jordi Cabot, Joseph Marvin Imperial, Juan A....

    2024 doi arXiv

  34. [43]

    Fu Erkang, Wang Yihao, Ren Yuxin, Fan Qiqi, and Wu Yuanhao. 2020. Study on Health Utility Optimization Control of Traditional Urban Block Open Space Based on Availability Theory. InProceedings of the 2019 The 2nd In- ternational Conference on Robotics, Control and Automation E...

    2020

  35. [44]

    Andrew R. Evans. 2016. The Treatment of Open Fractures.Operative Techniques in Orthopaedics26, 1 (March 2016), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.oto.2016.01. 004

    2016 doi

  36. [45]

    Amer Ezoji, Romain Pinquie, and Jean François Boujut. 2021. Towards a Better Understanding of Open Source Hardware Design Reuse in Company- Community Collaboration. InAdvances on Mechanics, Design Engineering and Manufacturing III, Lionel Roucoules, Manuel Paredes, Benoit Eyna...

    2021 doi

  37. [46]

    Carlos Muñoz Ferrandis and Danish Contractor. [n. d.]. The BigScience OpenRAIL-M License. https://bigscience.huggingface.co/blog/bigscience- openrail-m

  38. [47]

    FOSSID. [n. d.]. Source Available Licenses: How to Counter This Confusing License Category. https://fossid.com/articles/source-available-101-how-to- counter-this-confusing-license-category/

  39. [48]

    GNU Project Free Software Foundation. [n. d.]. What is Copyleft? https: //www.gnu.org/licenses/copyleft.html

  40. [49]

    Alex Gallimore. 2021. Can Open-Mindedness be Primed? An Investigation into Creativity, Openness to Experience, and Open-Mindedness Among College Students with Implications for Counselors.Journal of Interdisciplinary Graduate Research5, 1 (Nov. 2021). https://knowledge.e.southe...

    2021

  41. [50]

    Timnit Gebru, Jamie Morgenstern, Briana Vecchione, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, Hanna Wallach, Hal Daumé III, and Kate Crawford. 2021. Datasheets for Datasets. (Dec. 2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1803.09010 arXiv:1803.09010

    2021 doi arXiv

  42. [51]

    Michael Gusenbauer. 2019. Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases.Sciento- metrics118, 1 (Jan. 2019), 177–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5

    2019 doi

  43. [52]

    Michael Gusenbauer. 2022. Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases.Scientometrics127, 5 (May 2022), 2683–2745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04289-7

    2022 doi

  44. [53]

    Halawi and Michael P

    Mohamad J. Halawi and Michael P. Morwood. 2015. Acute Management of Open Fractures: An Evidence-Based Review.Orthopedics (Online)38, 11 (Nov. 2015), e1025–1033. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20151020-12

    2015 doi

  45. [54]

    Ross Haleliuk. 2023. Open source in cybersecurity: a deep dive. https:// ventureinsecurity.net/p/open-source-in-cybersecurity-a-deep

    2023

  46. [55]

    Hay, Matthew D

    Eleanor M. Hay, Matthew D. McGee, Craig R. White, and Steven L. Chown

  47. [56]

    Maximilian Heimstädt. 2017. Openwashing: A decoupling perspective on orga- nizational transparency.Technological Forecasting and Social Change125 (Dec. 2017), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.037

    2017 doi

  48. [58]

    https://doi.org/10.1098/ rspb.2024.0339

    Body size shapes song in honeyeaters.Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences291, 2021 (April 2024), 20240339. https://doi.org/10.1098/ rspb.2024.0339

    2021

  49. [59]

    2020.spaCy: Industrial-strength Natural Language Processing in Python

    Matthew Honnibal, Ines Montani, Sofie Van Landeghem, and Adriane Boyd. 2020.spaCy: Industrial-strength Natural Language Processing in Python. https: //doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1212303

    2020 doi

  50. [60]

    Amin Hosseiny Marani and Eric P. S. Baumer. 2024. A Review of Stability in Topic Modeling: Metrics for Assessing and Techniques for Improving Stability. Comput. Surveys56, 5 (May 2024), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3623269

    2024 doi

  51. [61]

    Dominik Hintersdorf, Lukas Struppek, and Kristian Kersting. 2025. Balancing Transparency and Risk: An Overview of the Security and Privacy Risks of Open-Source Machine Learning Models. InBridging the Gap Between AI and Reality, Bernhard Steffen (Ed.). Springer Nature Switzerla...

    2025 doi

  52. [62]

    Henk Huisseune, Sven De Schampheleire, Bernd Ameel, and Michel De Paepe

  53. [63]

    Open Source Initiative. 2006. History of the OSI. https://opensource.org/history

    2006

  54. [64]

    Edward Hughes, Michael Dennis, Jack Parker-Holder, Feryal Behbahani, Aditi Mavalankar, Yuge Shi, Tom Schaul, and Tim Rocktaschel. 2024. Open-Endedness is Essential for Artificial Superhuman Intelligence. (June 2024). https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.2406.04268 arXiv:2406.04268

    2024 doi arXiv

  55. [65]

    Putu Hadi Purnama Jati, Yi Lin, Sara Nodehi, Dwy Bagus Cahyono, and Mirjam van Reisen. 2022. FAIR Versus Open Data: A Comparison of Objectives and Principles.Data Intelligence4, 4 (Oct. 2022), 867–881. https://doi.org/10.1162/ dint_a_00176

    2022

  56. [66]

    Ravindu Jayakody and Gihan Dias. 2024. Performance of Recent Large Language Models for a Low-Resourced Language. In2024 International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP). 162–167. https://doi.org/10.1109/IALP63756.2024. 10661169

    2024

  57. [67]

    Zhang Jing-xiao, Lu Ning, Xu Fei, and Li Ping. 2010. Notice of Retraction: Comprehensive Evaluation of the Overall Quality of Urban Public Open Space. In2010 International Conference on E-Business and E-Government. 5122–5125. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEE.2010.1285

    2010

  58. [68]

    Open Source Initiative. 2024. The Open Source AI Definition – 1.0. https: //opensource.org/ai/open-source-ai-definition

    2024

  59. [69]

    Ho, Percy Liang, and Arvind Narayanan

    Sayash Kapoor, Rishi Bommasani, Kevin Klyman, Shayne Longpre, Ashwin Ramaswami, Peter Cihon, Aspen Hopkins, Kevin Bankston, Stella Biderman, Miranda Bogen, Rumman Chowdhury, Alex Engler, Peter Henderson, Yacine Jer- nite, Seth Lazar, Stefano Maffulli, Alondra Nelson, Joelle Pi...

    2024 doi arXiv

  60. [70]

    Edward Kembery, Ben Bucknall, and Morgan Simpson. 2024. Position Paper: Model Access should be a Key Concern in AI Governance. (Dec. 2024). https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.00836 arXiv:2412.00836

    2024 doi arXiv

  61. [71]

    Atieh Khanjani and Riza Sulaiman. 2011. The process of quality assurance under open source software development. In2011 IEEE Symposium on Computers & Informatics. 548–552. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCI.2011.5958975

    2011

  62. [72]

    Chiun-How Kao, Chih-Hung Hsieh, Yu-Feng Chu, Yu-Ting Kuang, and Chuan- Kai Yang. 2017. Using data visualization technique to detect sensitive informa- tion re-identification problem of real open dataset.Journal of Systems Architec- ture80 (Oct. 2017), 85–91. https://doi.org/10...

    2017 doi

  63. [73]

    Nikos Koutras. 2020. The Public Policy Basis for Open Access Publishing: A Scientific Approach.Publishing Research Quarterly36, 4 (Dec. 2020), 538–552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-020-09772-8

    2020 doi

  64. [74]

    Open Data

    Hiroko Kudo. 2019. Death of “Open Data”? - How Open Data has been realising and/or not realising Open Government.Central and Eastern European eDem and eGov Days335 (2019), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.24989/ocg.v335.40

    2019 doi

  65. [75]

    H. J. G. L. M. Lamers, M. Gieles, N. Bastian, H. Baumgardt, N. V. Kharchenko, and S. Portegies Zwart. 2005. An analytical description of the disruption of star clusters in tidal fields with an application to Galactic open clusters.Astronomy & Astrophysics441, 11 (Oct. 2005), 1...

    2005 doi

  66. [76]

    King, Lori McKee Walker, and Sheri J

    Laura A. King, Lori McKee Walker, and Sheri J. Broyles. 1996. Creativity and the Five-Factor Model.Journal of Research in Personality30, 2 (June 1996), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1996.0013

    1996

  67. [77]

    Hugo Laurençon, Lucile Saulnier, Thomas Wang, Christopher Akiki, Albert Villanova del Moral, Teven Le Scao, Leandro Von Werra, Chenghao Mou, Eduardo González Ponferrada, Huu Nguyen, Jörg Frohberg, Mario Šaško, Quentin Lhoest, Angelina McMillan-Major, Gerard Dupont, Stella Bide...

    2025 doi arXiv

  68. [78]

    Amanda Lee and Jeffrey C. Carver. 2019. FLOSS Participants’ Perceptions About Gender and Inclusiveness: A Survey. In2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, Montreal, QC, Canada, 677–687. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2019.00077

    2019

  69. [79]

    2014.Pediatric Cardiac Surgery in Developing Countries of Africa: Current State and Future Direction

    Kyongjune Benjamin Lee. 2014.Pediatric Cardiac Surgery in Developing Countries of Africa: Current State and Future Direction. Ph. D. Dissertation. Citeseer

    2014

  70. [80]

    2022.How Open Source Machine Learning Software Shapes AI

    Maximillian Langenkamp. 2022.How Open Source Machine Learning Software Shapes AI. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://dspace.mit. edu/handle/1721.1/145076 Accepted: 2022-08-29T16:31:18Z

    2022

  71. [81]

    Sabina Leonelli. 2023. Philosophy of Open Science.Elements in the Philosophy of Science(July 2023). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009416368

    2023 doi

  72. [82]

    Dong Sheng Li, Ya Fei Yan, Lu Li, and Hong Yu Zhang. 2011. A Study on Appraisal System of Open Space Suitability of City Square in Luoyang.Applied Mechanics and Materials99–100 (Sept. 2011), 596. https://doi.org/10.4028/www. scientific.net/AMM.99-100.596

    2011 doi

  73. [83]

    Ulrich Lichtenthaler. 2011. Open Innovation: Past Research, Current Debates, and Future Directions.Academy of Management Perspectives25, 1 (2011), 75–93

    2011

  74. [84]

    2022.bab2min/tomotopy: 0.12.3

    Minchul Lee. 2022.bab2min/tomotopy: 0.12.3. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. 6868418

    2022 doi

  75. [85]

    Andreas Liesenfeld, Alianda Lopez, and Mark Dingemanse. 2023. Opening up ChatGPT: Tracking openness, transparency, and accountability in instruction- tuned text generators. InProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces. 1–6. https://doi.or...

    2023

  76. [86]

    Qian Liu, Xin Zhao, and Baowen Sun. 2018. Value co-creation mechanisms of enterprises and users under crowdsource-based open innovation.International Journal of Crowd Science2, 1 (2018), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCS-01-2018- 0001

    2018 doi

  77. [87]

    Jonne Maas and Aarón Moreno Inglés. 2024. Beyond Participatory AI.Pro- ceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society7 (Oct. 2024), 932–942

    2024

  78. [88]

    Andreas Liesenfeld and Mark Dingemanse. 2024. Rethinking open source gener- ative AI: open washing and the EU AI Act. InThe 2024 ACM Conference on Fair- ness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, Rio de Janeiro Brazil, 1774–1787. https://doi.org/10.1145/3630106.3659005

    2024

  79. [89]

    Stefano Maffulli. 2023. Meta’s LLaMa 2 license is not Open Source. https: //opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not-open-source

    2023

  80. [90]

    Ana-Maria Matei-Sarandi. 2024. Implementing Open Government At The Local Level In Romania: Case Study: The Municipality Of Bras,ov.International Journal of Business, Law and Political Science1, 1111 (Nov. 2024), 1–6. https: //doi.org/10.61796/ijblps.v1i11.236

    2024 doi

  81. [91]

    Blesson Mathew, Annapurni Subramaniam, and Bhuwan Chandra Bhatt. 2008. Be phenomenon in open clusters: results from a survey of emission-line stars in young open clusters.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society388, 4 (Aug. 2008), 1879–1888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j....

    2008

  82. [92]

    Stefano Maffulli. 2022. Defining an open source AI for the greater good. https: //opensource.com/article/22/10/defining-open-source-ai

    2022

  83. [93]

    Feder Cooper, and Danish Contractor

    Daniel McDuff, Tim Korjakow, Scott Cambo, Jesse Josua Benjamin, Jenny Lee, Yacine Jernite, Carlos Muñoz Ferrandis, Aaron Gokaslan, Alek Tarkowski, Joseph Lindley, A. Feder Cooper, and Danish Contractor. 2024. On the Standardization of Behavioral Use Clauses and Their Adoption ...

    2024 doi arXiv

  84. [94]

    2010.Small mammal abundance, habitat se- lection, and movement patterns in shrub-steppe habitat in British Columbia’s Okanagan Valley

    Natalie Christina Melaschenko. 2010.Small mammal abundance, habitat se- lection, and movement patterns in shrub-steppe habitat in British Columbia’s Okanagan Valley. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of British Columbia. https: //doi.org/10.14288/1.0069052

    2010 doi

  85. [95]

    Margaret Mitchell, Simone Wu, Andrew Zaldivar, Parker Barnes, Lucy Vasser- man, Ben Hutchinson, Elena Spitzer, Inioluwa Deborah Raji, and Timnit Gebru

  86. [96]

    Ayanda Mazibuko. 2024. Participating in the Violence Prevention Forum: Ex- periences of government officials.ISS Southern Africa Report2024, 59 (2024), 1–24

    2024

  87. [97]

    1997.Open-Ended Mathematics Tasks: How Did a Middle School Teacher Interpret and Use Information Acquired through the Examination of Student Responses?ERIC

    Barbara Moskal. 1997.Open-Ended Mathematics Tasks: How Did a Middle School Teacher Interpret and Use Information Acquired through the Examination of Student Responses?ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED409379 ERIC Number: ED409379

    1997

  88. [98]

    Soheil Mottaghi, Sandra Kohl, Susana Liebana, M Wilson, C Klaus, C Münkel, and Ulrich G Hofmann. 2019. Hemi-Parkinsonian Rat Motor/Non-Motor Symptom Evaluation with Deep Brain Stimulation. In2019 9th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering (NER). 369–372. http...

    2019

  89. [99]

    Nancy Murphy. 2003. Open Architecture: New Technology for Retirement Plans. Compensation & Benefits Review35, 4 (July 2003), 61–66. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0886368703254516

    2003

  90. [100]

    Achmad Delianur Nasution and Wahyuni Zahrah. 2015. The Space is Not Ours, the Life of Public Open Space in Gated Community in Medan, Indonesia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences202 (Aug. 2015), 144–151. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.217

    2015 doi

  91. [101]

    Tyler Mondres. 2018. The Present and Future Payments Ecosystem.American Bankers Association. ABA Banking Journal110, 2 (April 2018), 38–40

    2018

  92. [102]

    Musa Nuhu. 2020. IMPACT OF TRADE OPENNESS AND EXCHANGE RATE VOLATILITYON ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NIGERIA.INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF AFRICAN & ASIAN STUDIES (IJAAS)6, 2 (Oct. 2020). https: //nigerianjournalsonline.com/index.php/ijaas/article/view/1310

    2020

  93. [103]

    Muhammet Recep OKUR. 2019. Dropout in Open and Distance Learning: Active and Passive Learners.ndannual(2019), 192

    2019

  94. [104]

    Democratise

    Cailean Osborne. 2024. Why Companies “Democratise” Artificial Intelligence: The Case of Open Source Software Donations. (Sept. 2024). https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.2409.17876 arXiv:2409.17876

    2024 doi arXiv

  95. [105]

    Cailean Osborne, Jennifer Ding, and Hannah Rose Kirk. 2024. The AI Com- munity Building the Future? A Quantitative Analysis of Development Activity on Hugging Face Hub.Journal of Computational Social Science7, 2 (Oct. 2024), 2067–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-024-00300-8

    2024 doi

  96. [106]

    2022.The Impact of Institutions on Economic Growth

    Hala Nour. 2022.The Impact of Institutions on Economic Growth. M.S. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, United States – Illinois. https://www.proquest. com/docview/2681905278/abstract/781879E8EE80412APQ/1

    2022

  97. [107]

    2022.Surgical Interventions for Knee Disorders

    Charalambos Panayiotou Charalambous. 2022.Surgical Interventions for Knee Disorders. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 259–282. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-54506-2_9

    2022 doi

  98. [108]

    Bruce Perens et al. 1999. The open source definition.Open sources: voices from the open source revolution1 (1999), 171–188

    1999

  99. [109]

    Michael A. Peters. 2014. Openness and the Intellectual Commons.Open Review of Educational Research1, 1 (Jan. 2014), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507. 2014.984975

    2014

  100. [110]

    Peters and Peter Roberts

    Michael A. Peters and Peter Roberts. 2015.Virtues of Openness: Education, Science, and Scholarship in the Digital Age. Routledge. Google-Books-ID: r13vCgAAQBAJ

    2015

  101. [111]

    Smith, and Arthur Spirling

    Alexis Palmer, Noah A. Smith, and Arthur Spirling. 2024. Using proprietary language models in academic research requires explicit justification.Nature Computational Science4, 1 (Jan. 2024), 2–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43588-023- 00585-1

    2024 doi

  102. [112]

    Kunat Pipatanakul, Phatrasek Jirabovonvisut, Potsawee Manakul, Sittipong Sripaisarnmongkol, Ruangsak Patomwong, Pathomporn Chokchainant, and Kasima Tharnpipitchai. 2023. Typhoon: Thai Large Language Models. (Dec. 2023). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.13951 arXiv:2312.13951

    2023 doi arXiv

  103. [113]

    Aurelia Magdalena Pisoschi and Claudia Gabriela Pisoschi. 2016. Is open access the solution to increase the impact of scientific journals?Scientometrics109, 2 (Nov. 2016), 1075–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2088-x

    2016 doi

  104. [114]

    Jeffrey Pomerantz and Robin Peek. 2016. Fifty shades of open.First Monday (April 2016). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i5.6360

    2016 doi

  105. [115]

    Mahima Pushkarna, Andrew Zaldivar, and Oddur Kjartansson. 2022. Data Cards: Purposeful and Transparent Dataset Documentation for Responsible AI. (April 2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.01075 arXiv:2204.01075

    2022 doi arXiv

  106. [116]

    Vaida Pilinkiene. 2016. Trade openness, economic growth and competitiveness. The case of the Central and Eastern European countries /.Inžinerin ˙e ekonomika 27, 2 (2016), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.27.2.14013

    2016 doi

  107. [117]

    Reese, Suren A

    Matthew O. Reese, Suren A. Gevorgyan, Mikkel Jørgensen, Eva Bundgaard, Sarah R. Kurtz, David S. Ginley, Dana C. Olson, Matthew T. Lloyd, Pasquale Morvillo, Eugene A. Katz, Andreas Elschner, Olivier Haillant, Travis R. Cur- rier, Vishal Shrotriya, Martin Hermenau, Moritz Riede,...

    2011

  108. [118]

    2024.Opportunities in open strategy for SMEs

    Matias Retva. 2024.Opportunities in open strategy for SMEs. Master’s thesis. University of Vaasa

    2024

  109. [119]

    Lorinda MNM Riley and Jessica P Kaneakua. 2024. (Re) Building Trust With Indigenous Communities: Reflections From Cultural Brokers.Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement28, 3 (2024)

    2024

  110. [120]

    Moin Roberts-Islam. 2024. OpenAI’s Sora Tool Leaked By Group Of Aggrieved Early Testers. https://www.forbes.com/sites/moinroberts-islam/2024/11/26/ FAccT ’25, June 23–26, 2025, Athens, Greece Tamara Paris, AJung Moon, and Jin L.C. Guo openais-sora-tool-leaked-by-group-of-aggri...

    2024

  111. [121]

    Pei Qian, Sibo Huang, Yan Liu, Nengyin Wang, and Yong Li. 2024. Broadband sound absorbers via quality-factor modulation.International Journal of Mechan- ical Sciences271 (June 2024), 109130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2024. 109130

    2024 doi

  112. [122]

    Michael Röder, Andreas Both, and Alexander Hinneburg. 2015. Exploring the Space of Topic Coherence Measures. InProceedings of the Eighth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. ACM, Shanghai China, 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1145/2684822.2685324

    2015

  113. [123]

    Samoylichenko

    Maria A. Samoylichenko. 2024. Optimal Switching Order of a Reflection- Symmetric Flexible Printed Cable with Multiple Modal Reservation. In2024 International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Applications and Manufactur- ing (ICIEAM). 424–428. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEA...

    2024

  114. [124]

    Teven Le Scao, Angela Fan, Christopher Akiki, Ellie Pavlick, Suzana Ilić, Daniel Hesslow, Roman Castagné, Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, François Yvon, Matthias Gallé, Jonathan Tow, Alexander M. Rush, Stella Biderman, Albert Webson, Pawan Sasanka Ammanamanchi, Thomas Wang, Benoît S...

    2023 doi arXiv

  115. [125]

    Openness

    Daniel Schlagwein, Kieran Conboy, Joseph Feller, Jan Marco Leimeister, and Lorraine Morgan. 2017. “Openness” with and without Information Technology: A Framework and a Brief History.Journal of Information Technology32, 4 (Dec. 2017), 297–305. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-017-0049-3

    2017 doi

  116. [126]

    Ruiz-Riquer

    Gustavo O. Ruiz-Riquer. 1996.Novel results on propagation characteristics in opti- cal fibers. Ph.D. University of Rhode Island, United States – Rhode Island. https: //www.proquest.com/docview/304269357/abstract/1423A0EE9B6C4520PQ/1

    1996

  117. [127]

    Elizabeth Seger, Aviv Ovadya, Divya Siddarth, Ben Garfinkel, and Allan Dafoe

  118. [128]

    Shah, Jay P

    Rajiv C. Shah, Jay P. Kesan, and Andrew Kennis. 2008. Lessons for Government Adoption of Open Standards: A Case Study of the Massachusetts Policy.Journal of Information Technology & Politics5, 4 (Dec. 2008), 387–398. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19331680802579366

    2008 doi

  119. [129]

    N. J. Shankar, E. S. Chan, and Q. Y. Zhang. 2001. Three-dimensional numerical simulation for an open channel flow with a constriction.Journal of Hydraulic Research39, 2 (April 2001), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221680109499820

    2001 doi

  120. [130]

    Renee Shelby, Shalaleh Rismani, Kathryn Henne, AJung Moon, Negar Ros- tamzadeh, Paul Nicholas, N’Mah Yilla-Akbari, Jess Gallegos, Andrew Smart, Emilio Garcia, and Gurleen Virk. 2023. Sociotechnical Harms of Algorith- mic Systems: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reduction. InProcee...

    2023

  121. [131]

    Open Source AI

    Bruce Schneier. 2024. AI Industry is Trying to Subvert the Definition of “Open Source AI”. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/11/ai-industry-is- trying-to-subvert-the-definition-of-open-source-ai.html

    2024

  122. [132]

    Dai, and Yongli Lu

    Baoguo Shi, David Y. Dai, and Yongli Lu. 2016. Openness to Experience as a Moderator of the Relationship between Intelligence and Creative Thinking: A Study of Chinese Children in Urban and Rural Areas.Frontiers in Psychology7 (May 2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00641

    2016

  123. [133]

    Long Shi and Guomin Zhang. 2016. An empirical model to predict the per- formance of typical solar chimneys considering both room and cavity con- figurations.Building and Environment103 (July 2016), 250–261. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.024

    2016 doi

  124. [134]

    Shrestha, G

    Y.R. Shrestha, G. von Krogh, and S. Feuerriegel. 2023. Building open-source AI. Nature Computational Science3, 11 (2023), 908–911. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s43588-023-00540-0

    2023

  125. [135]

    Sid Sijbrandij. 2023. AI weights are not open "source". https://opencoreventures. com/blog/2023-06-27-ai-weights-are-not-open-source/

    2023

  126. [136]

    Amitpal Singh, Sunil Kumar Gupta, and Hardeep Singh. 2018. A Perspective on Open Source Software Development Movement.Asian Journal of Computer Science and Technology7, 33 (Nov. 2018), 96–105. https://doi.org/10.51983/ajcst- 2018.7.3.1888

    2018 doi

  127. [137]

    Toby Shevlane and Allan Dafoe. 2020. The Offense-Defense Balance of Scientific Knowledge: Does Publishing AI Research Reduce Misuse?. InProceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 173–179...

    2020

  128. [138]

    Sisti and W

    S. Sisti and W. Bennette. 2022. Open-Set Recognition for Automatic Target Recognition: Practical Considerations for Obtaining Out of Distribution Exam- ples. InAutomatic Target Recognition XXXII, Vol. 12096. https://doi.org/10.1117/ 12.2618489

    2022

  129. [139]

    Irene Solaiman. 2023. The Gradient of Generative AI Release: Methods and Con- siderations. InProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, Opening the Scope of Openness in AI FAccT ’25, June 23–26, 2025, Athens, Greece and Transparency(Chicago, IL, USA)(F...

    2023

  130. [140]

    Richard Stallman. 1985. The GNU Manifesto. https://www.gnu.org/gnu/ manifesto.en.html

    1985

  131. [141]

    open source

    Richard Stallman. 2009. ViewpointWhy “open source” misses the point of free software.Commun. ACM52, 6 (June 2009), 31–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1516046.1516058

    2009

  132. [142]

    Dadang Sukirman, Budi Setiawan, and Cepi Riyana. 2022. Development of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) Content to Improve Indonesian Teachers’ Pedagogical Competence: MOOC Technology Instructional Process.Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies11, 6 (Nov. 2022), 255. h...

    2022

  133. [143]

    Amar Pal Singh. 2019. Open Markets and Diversity of India’s Politico-Legal Ordering.Open Markets, Free Trade and Sustainable Development: Perspectives from EU and India(2019), 51–59

    2019

  134. [144]

    Alaa Tarazi. 2024. Comparative Analysis of the Bibliographic Data Sources Using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Lens : Comparative Analysis of Bibliographic Data Sources.High Yield Medical Reviews2, 1 (June 2024). https: //doi.org/10.59707/hymrUNHW4628

    2024 doi

  135. [145]

    Reiter, and Thomas Ristenpart

    Florian Tramèr, Fan Zhang, Ari Juels, Michael K. Reiter, and Thomas Ristenpart

  136. [146]

    Afyon Kocatepe University, Erhan Bingölbali, Independent Scholar, and Ferhan Bingölbali. 2021. An Examination of Open-Ended Mathematics Questions’ Affordances.International Journal of Progressive Education17, 4 (Aug. 2021), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.366.1

    2021 doi

  137. [147]

    Suzan van Brussel, Miranda Timmermans, Peter Verkoeijen, and Fred Paas. 2023. Comparing instructional strategies to support student teachers’ learning to prepare an open-minded citizenship education lesson.Instructional Science51, 3 (2023), 451–473

    2023

  138. [148]

    Thed N van Leeuwen, Clifford Tatum, and Paul Wouters. 2015. Open Access Publishing and Citation Impact-An International Study.. InISSI

    2015

  139. [149]

    Akwal Sunner and Aylin Ates. 2019. Open strategy: a review and research agenda. InBAM 2019 Conference Proceedings. British Academy of Management. British Academy of Management

    2019

  140. [150]

    James Vincent. 2023. Meta’s powerful AI language model has leaked online — what happens now? https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/8/23629362/meta-ai- language-model-llama-leak-online-misuse

    2023

  141. [151]

    Bahtijar Vogel, Arianit Kurti, Tommi Mikkonen, and Marcelo Milrad. 2014. Towards an Open Architecture Model for Web and Mobile Software: Character- istics and Validity Properties. In2014 IEEE 38th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference. 476–485. https://doi.org/1...

    2014 doi

  142. [152]

    In25th USENIX security symposium (USENIX Security 16)

    Stealing Machine Learning Models via Prediction APIs. In25th USENIX security symposium (USENIX Security 16). 601–618. https://www.usenix.org/ conference/usenixsecurity16/technical-sessions/presentation/tramer

  143. [153]

    Tobias Weiblen. 2014. The open business model: Understanding an emerging concept.Journal of Multi Business Model Innovation and Technology2, 1 (2014), 35–66

    2014

  144. [154]

    Tobias Wenzel. 2023. Open hardware: From DIY trend to global transformation in access to laboratory equipment.PLOS Biology21, 1 (Jan. 2023), e3001931. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001931

    2023 doi

  145. [155]

    Matt White, Ibrahim Haddad, Cailean Osborne, Xiao-Yang Liu Yanglet, Ahmed Abdelmonsef, and Sachin Varghese. 2024. The Model Openness Framework: Promoting Completeness and Openness for Reproducibility, Transparency, and Usability in Artificial Intelligence. (Aug. 2024). https:/...

    2024 doi arXiv

  146. [156]

    Apostol Vassilev, Alina Oprea, Alie Fordyce, and Hyrum Andersen. 2024. Ad- versarial Machine Learning: A Taxonomy and Terminology of Attacks and Mitigations.NIST(Jan. 2024). https://www.nist.gov/publications/adversarial- machine-learning-taxonomy-and-terminology-attacks-and-mi...

    2024

  147. [157]

    Widder, M

    D.G. Widder, M. Whittaker, and S.M. West. 2024. Why ‘open’ AI systems are actually closed, and why this matters.Nature635, 8040 (2024), 827–833. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08141-1

    2024 doi

  148. [158]

    Ethical AI

    David Gray Widder, Dawn Nafus, Laura Dabbish, and James Herbsleb. 2022. Limits and Possibilities for “Ethical AI” in Open Source: A Study of Deepfakes. InProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’22). Association for Computing...

    2022

  149. [159]

    2024.The use of nauticAi Log on Board Finnish Flagged Vessels

    Jan Henrik Wassholm and Ellinor Lindblom. 2024.The use of nauticAi Log on Board Finnish Flagged Vessels. Master’s thesis

    2024

  150. [160]

    David Wiley, T. J. Bliss, and Mary McEwen. 2014.Open Educational Resources: A Review of the Literature. Springer, New York, NY, 781–789. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_63

    2014

  151. [161]

    Williamson

    Jeanine M. Williamson. 2018.Chapter 9 - Self-Reflection as a Way of Improving Instruction. Chandos Publishing, 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08- 101881-1.00009-1

    2018 doi

  152. [162]

    Robert Wolfe, Isaac Slaughter, Bin Han, Bingbing Wen, Yiwei Yang, Lucas Rosenblatt, Bernease Herman, Eva Brown, Zening Qu, Nic Weber, and Bill Howe. 2024. Laboratory-Scale AI: Open-Weight Models are Competitive with ChatGPT Even in Low-Resource Settings. InProceedings of the 2...

    2024

  153. [163]

    Jess Whittlestone and Aviv Ovadya. 2020. The tension between openness and prudence in AI research. (Jan. 2020). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1910.01170 arXiv:1910.01170

    2020 doi arXiv

  154. [164]

    2016.Clinical Trials: Interventional Studies

    Michael Wolzt and Stefan Aschauer. 2016.Clinical Trials: Interventional Studies. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-27347-1_8

    2016 doi

  155. [165]

    2021.Atmospheric drivers of ice drift in the Antarctic marginal ice zone

    Ashleigh Catherine Stevenson Womack. 2021.Atmospheric drivers of ice drift in the Antarctic marginal ice zone. Master’s thesis. University of Cape Town. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33982

    2021

  156. [166]

    David Gray Widder, Sarah West, and Meredith Whittaker. 2023. Open (For Business): Big Tech, Concentrated Power, and the Political Economy of Open AI.Concentrated Power, and the Political Economy of Open AI (August 17, 2023) 4543807 (Aug. 2023). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4543807

    2023 doi

  157. [167]

    Yaghi, Michael O’Keeffe, Nathan W

    Omar M. Yaghi, Michael O’Keeffe, Nathan W. Ockwig, Hee K. Chae, Mohamed Eddaoudi, and Jaheon Kim. 2003. Reticular synthesis and the design of new materials.Nature423, 6941 (June 2003), 705–714. https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature01650

    2003

  158. [168]

    Santiago Zanella-Beguelin, Shruti Tople, Andrew Paverd, and Boris Köpf. 2021. Grey-box Extraction of Natural Language Models. InProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 12278–12286. https: //proceedings.mlr.press/v139/zanella-beguelin21a.html

    2021

  159. [169]

    Junwen Zhu and Weishu Liu. 2020. A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers.Scientometrics123, 1 (April 2020), 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8

    2020 doi

  160. [170]

    Bastian Wolff and Daniel Schlagwein. 2021. From Open Science to Open Source (and beyond): A Historical Perspective on Open Practices without and with IT. In17th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. ACM, Online Spain, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479986.3479990

    2021

  161. [171]

    Mark Zuckerberg. 2024. Open Source AI Is the Path Forward. https://about.fb. com/news/2024/07/open-source-ai-is-the-path-forward/ A Appendix: Details of the Topic Model Here we provide further details on the evaluation methods, hy- perparameters and results of the topic model ...

    2024

  162. [173]

    Chengbo Xie and Sijia Hu. 2024. Open banking: an early review.Journal of Internet and Digital Economics4, 2 (July 2024), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JIDE-03-2024-0009

    2024

  163. [177]

    Didar Zowghi and Muneera Bano. 2024. AI for all: Diversity and Inclusion in AI.AI and Ethics4, 4 (Nov. 2024), 873–876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024- 00485-8

    2024 doi

  164. [2015]

    2015), 1–9

    Comparison of metal foam heat exchangers to a finned heat exchanger for low Reynolds number applications.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer89 (Oct. 2015), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015. 05.013

    2015 doi

  165. [2016]

    Open Praxis8, 2 (May 2016), 111–121

    The Best of Two Open Worlds at the National Open University of Nigeria. Open Praxis8, 2 (May 2016), 111–121

    2016

  166. [2019]

    InProceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

    Model Cards for Model Reporting. InProceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3287560.3287596

  167. [2024]

    (July 2024)

    Stealing Part of a Production Language Model. (July 2024). https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.06634 arXiv:2403.06634

    2024 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.