MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021029019 · doi:10.1300/j103v19n01_01

Never Enough

2000· article· en· W2021029019 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral & Social Sciences Librarian · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)Academic libraryComputer scienceLibrary scienceBusinessWorld Wide WebPublic relationsPolitical scienceHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Faculty frequently request that their libraries subscribe to new journals. Such subscription demands often exceed resources, but faculty resist suggestions that journal cancellations are necessary to fund the purchase of new subscriptions. At one large urban academic library, this conundrum necessitated a concrete demonstration of journal usage. Analysis of journal citations from a decade of social work theses supplied quantifiable data to support decisions for journal purchase, cancellation, and placement in storage. Nearly 85% of journal citations came from locally owned journals. Nearly one-quarter of the library's social work journals were cited fewer than ten times during the decade, providing a list of candidates for cancellation to fund subscriptions to new journals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.276 · 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