The April 2015 Update to RDA and Its Impact on Music Instructions: A Review of What Music Cataloguers Need to Know
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The April 2015 release of the RDA Toolkit includes major content updates to RDA: Resource Description and Access. Several of the revisions included in the release modify instructions that are used by music cataloguers on a regular basis. This article reviews the most important of these changes with the purpose of making it easier for music cataloguers to navigate the various changes that have taken place in relation to music cataloguing. It examines specifically the impact of the revisions regarding the statement of responsibility, the extent of notated music, the duration, preferred titles of musical works, abbreviations in titles for parts of musical works, and access points representing musical expressions. The article illustrates some of the changes by including examples that were revised or added. It also includes a table which is a comparison of the structure of 6.14.2 instructions before and after the April 2015 update, because of the numerous changes in this area. While this article is aimed primarily at music cataloguers, it could also be of interest to music librarians concerned with cataloguing issues.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".