MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995535716 · doi:10.1080/19322909.2013.839849

Assessing the Value of E-Resources to York University Faculty Using the MINES for Libraries Protocol: An Evolving Landscape

2013· article· en· W1995535716 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Web Librarianship · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Protocol (science)Library scienceValue (mathematics)Resource (disambiguation)Field (mathematics)Knowledge managementComputer scienceData scienceEngineering managementEngineeringMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes how York University analyzed the results from its 2010–11 implementation of the Measuring the Impact of Networked Electronic Services for Libraries survey to measure value of investments in e-resources. The results were assessed through two variables: e-resources used by faculty when carrying out funded and non-funded research, and e-resources ranked by faculty as being important in their specific field. The article also includes a description of work currently underway to assess e-resource data through other lenses, such as effects on student success.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.220 · 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