Measuring the Added Value of Library and Information Services: The New Zealand Approach
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
La Methodologie V+LM (Value-Added Library Methodologie) de Bibliotheque concernant la valeur ajoutee est une approche structuree permettant de quantifier et de mesurer les services des bibliotheques en tenant compte de ceux des services que les bibliotheques offrent aux groupes de leurs usagers. V+LM identifie et souligne le retour sur les budgets que les sponsors (fondations privees) investissent en matiere des bibliotheques et d'information. Considerant ainsi les bibliotheques non plus comme un lieu de frais mais comme un bon investissement d'affaires pour les entreprises, les universites et la societe. La methodologie peut mesurer la production de bibliotheque dans sa totalite, ou les services specifiques tels que des programmes d'information sur alphabetisation. V+LM mesure des benefices intangibles employant des concepts economiques comme le cout d'opportunite, le cout mandataire et taux du marche. Les benefices tires sont compares a l'investissement du reseau employant la norme sur les pratiques de comptabilite. V+LM a ete mis en place dans trois bibliotheques de la Nouvelle-Zelande : la Bibliotheque Parlementaire de Nouvelle-Zelande, la Bibliotheque de l'Universite du Canterbury et les Bibliotheques Publiques a Manakau. Cet article decrit les conclusions des trois etudes, met en avant des particularites communes aux milieux parlementaires, d'enseignement superieur et des bibliotheques publiques mais il attire aussi l'attention sur les differences.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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