Research Has Changed, Have Libraries?
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Over the past several decades, the direct intersection between university libraries and academic research has noticeably diminished. In recent years, however, new relationships between libraries and researchers have begun to evolve based on shared interest in emerging technologies, research techniques, and the perceived need, particularly in the social sciences and humanities, for robust digital platforms and services. This paper reviews outcomes of a multi-year, $1M study funded by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation conducted at the University of Calgary, Academic Research and University Libraries: Creating a New Model for Collaboration. This project seeks to identify, through evidence-based inquiry, what constellation of services will be necessary to support today’s multidisciplinary research. It also reflects the broad recognition, as seen in funder and university research priorities, that “grand challenges” of this century require true cross-disciplinary inquiry. How are research libraries responding to these changes? This study began in 2015 and has evolved over several phases. The initial phase involved more than 50 faculty, from 15 disciplines, in facilitated discussions to define what they needed from a 21st-century library to support their multidisciplinary research. The discussions included external experts, and library staff participation as observers but not contributors to ensure the deliberations were not overly influenced by library-centric perspectives. Building on scholars’ expressed needs, the Library undertook a second phase of inquiry through competitive sub-grants, in which faculty proposed research projects and worked with library staff to define what the needed services, expertise, and infrastructure would be. In two successive competitions, 12 faculty projects have been approved with approximately $400,000 in internal grants disbursed. The process includes external reviews by expert panels. Through these studies, essential elements of the new research platform have emerged: • analytics and visualization • data curation and sharing • digitization to support content analysis • metadata services • dissemination • rights management • virtual and augmented reality • design and modelling for digital – 3D creation • web programming • collaborative spaces Other key findings include: • the importance of direct collaboration between library staff and scholars, and between library staff in different areas, in shaping services • the essential role of a library research project facilitator • the new synergies between digital content and analytical tools • how special collections can be exploited in new ways, e.g., text mining • a need for lab-like spaces to support evolving research methodologies. Faculty who may seldom have been seen in the library are now using these lab environments and incorporating students into the experience. Senior research administrators involved in the study have been learning about, and promoting, these new library capacities. Ultimately, the findings emerging from this and related studies will inform conversations about research libraries’ future roles, and their continuing relevance in the modern research ecosystem. Presentation video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUldbTN64Nk.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,020 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle