Bibliographic record
Abstract
The past, present, and future development of AACB2 is outlined with particular emphasis on the directions provided by the International Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR held in Toronto in October 1997. International cooperation as a significant element in the development and future of the code was highlighted. The Toronto conference, an invitational meeting attended by 65 cataloging experts, was undertaken by the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) as part of its ongoing mandate to respond to changing needs. Among the actions and recommendations resulting from the conference, the following were approved by JSC for immediate action: develop a mission statement for JSC; create a list of the principles of AACR2; pursue the recommendation that a logical analysis of the principles and structure on which AACR2 is based be undertaken; establish an AACR Web site; determine whether there are surveys on the use of AACR2 outside the Anglo-American community, and if no such survey exists, conduct such a survey; formulate the recommendations on serials endorsed during the conference and introduce them into the revision process; publicize and reaffirm JSC policies, procedures, activities, and the current process for submitting ride revision proposals; and solicit a proposal to revise ride 0.24. The international conference has helped JSC to develop an plan of action, which will test the applicability of AACR in current and future environments and balance the need for a sound and workable cataloging code with the cost of cataloging and change.
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 | 0.027 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.041 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.012 |
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".