MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037491825 · doi:10.1002/meet.1450400171

E‐commerce in libraries. Sponsored by SIG LT

2003· article· en· W2037491825 on OpenAlexaff
Heidi Fogelberg, Peter Scott, Marjorie M.K. Hlava, Alan Pannell

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld Wide WebE-commerceThe InternetCatalogingComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)BusinessProcess (computing)Work (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract E‐commerce is becoming ubiquitous but what does it mean for libraries? Some would argue that in strict terms, libraries have been involved in e‐commerce for years with the marketing of services and resources through web pages. Others would argue that libraries are just beginning to enter the world of e‐commerce with forays into offering ways for library users to pay fines or buy copies of photographs or other items online. Participants will learn about the different ways e‐commerce can be interpreted and how libraries are implementing e‐commerce initiatives. Another side of e‐commerce in libraries is the companies delivering products and services to libraries. Delivering materials to libraries using e‐commerce methods has some benefits and some drawbacks to previous methods. An additional feature to be considered is the increased use of credit cards which speed the process. On the other hand the need to work with consortia and hierarchical or group buying of other sorts brings new complexity. MediaSleuth enables the purchase of non print educational media and the accompanying MARC cataloging over the web. Participants will also learn about the design considerations to enable electronic selection, purchase and delivery of these materials using the internet that one such company uses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1810.124

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the American Society for Information Science and TechnologySame topicWeb and Library ServicesFrench-language works237,207