The Canadian National Site Licensing Project and the logic model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To determine whether Canada's university research capacity could be increased in quantity, breadth and depth of published scholarly information available to academic researchers, especially through the use of e-journals and cooperatively negotiated pricing and licensing of them. Design/methodology/approach Evaluates the three-year demonstration project funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation known as the Canadian National Site Licensing Project (CNSLP). This project used surveys and a logical model method, which integrates inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts into an account of how a program is fulfilling its objectives. Findings Demonstrates that CNSLP has successfully found a new model for negotiating and licensing electronic information to expand information available to researchers. It also identified that over 80 percent of respondents surveyed believe that e-journal access has had a significant impact on their ability to conduct research. Originality/value Both illustrates a model to provide greater access to e-journals and shows that greater access to electronic information increases use of peripheral literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it