Category:Quality of an object

From Opasnet
Jump to: navigation, search


Quality of object describes possible levels of quality of an object in the Opasnet.



Quality of an object (in practice, a page on the Opasnet), can be assessed based on at least three different criteria:

  1. Peer review. The basis for the review is the quality of work performed.
    • Unacceptable: The page does not comply with minimum standards of scientific work.
    • Acceptable: The page has utilised acceptable scientific methods in a proper way, and sufficient scientific critique has been applied.
    • State of the art: The page has been developed using state-of-the-art scientific methods and information.
    • Outstanding: The page has been developed using highly innovative methods and/or data.
  2. Assessment by an independent expert of the field. The basis for the assessment is a quantitative comparison against an external standard. The properties assessed are the following:
  3. Self-evaluation. The basis for the evaluation is the amount and type of work performed. Possible grades:
    • Unstructured: The page does not (yet) have a proper structure and/or estimate.
    • Placeholder: an estimate based on guesswork rather than data. However, the page is structured in the right way and has the desired functionality (e.g. as a part of a model).
    • Preliminary: an estimate based on maybe one piece of evidence. Reliability has not been evaluated.
    • Draft: an estimate based on several independent pieces of evidence. Reliability of at least some pieces is considered adequate.
    • Review: an estimate based on a systematic literature review and a formal method to derive a result based on the evidence.

See also


Pages in category "Quality of an object"

This category contains only the following page.