MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1779703581 · doi:10.21083/partnership.v3i1.416

Electronic Serials Usage Patterns as Observed at a Medium-Size University: Searches and Full-Text Downloads.

2008· article· en· W1779703581 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownloadComputer scienceCollection developmentWorld Wide WebLibrary scienceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the number of electronic serials available to libraries continues to increase while library budgets remain either stagnant or on the decrease, it becomes necessary to evaluate the use of a library’s electronic collection. In 2006, usage statistics were evaluated at Laurentian University, Canada, to provide direction to collection development and identify high-cost low-use electronic serials. Searches and full-text downloads were studied. A sharp increase in use was observed in and around 2004 which can be explained by the introduction, in Ontario, of the ‘double cohort’, by the rapid increase in the number of electronic resources subscribed to at Laurentian, and by the adoption of OpenURL technology. Heavily used electronic serials are identified. Turnaways, connections by IP address and Bradford’s 20:80 rule are also examined. The application of a cost-per-download ratio provided a practical method for identifying underused products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.034
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it