Interlibrary Loan and Resource Sharing Products: An Overview of Current Features and Functionality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Like cataloging in the 1970s and circulation in the 1980s, interlibrary loan has become a focus of product development by many library vendors. The development of new ILL software and systems has significantly expanded during the past five years. A number of vendors are implementing the international standard for interlibrary loan communication, the ISO ILL Protocol, by incorporating Protocol communication capabilities into their new, comprehensive ILL applications. Other vendors are offering products that support patron-initiated ordering from either a physical or virtual union catalog. New products to manage internal files and procedures of traditional, mediated ILL have also been introduced or upgraded significantly. Marketing of these products by some vendors would suggest that their product is the solution for all ILL needs. They are not. This publication is intended to help ILL managers and library administrators to understand the differences among 23 products and their functionality, designed to support ILL operations in all types and sizes libraries in the United States and Canada. Terminology Used in the Publication Interlibrary loan (ILL) and document delivery (DD) are encompassing terms that define the process used by a library (or library's patron) to obtain an item or surrogate of an item from another library or document supplier. ILL is used in this publication to describe both the requesting and supplying of books and other returnables, and of copies of journal articles and other nonreturnables. Resource sharing is used in this publication to characterize a circulation-based process that permits patrons to search physical or virtual union catalogs and place circulation holds on items held by libraries in the consortium. Mediated ILL characterizes the process handled by ILL staff. Unmediated borrowing indicates the patron has searched, found, and ordered the item. What's Included in Each Review Descriptions of each product are adapted from responses to a detailed questionnaire (Appendix 2) as well as general information gleaned from Web sites and personal product knowledge. Vendors that did not respond to the questionnaire were contacted to see if they would submit a response; several chose not to respond, and their lack of response should not be interpreted negatively. The Structure of Each Chapter Each chapter includes an overview, a section on borrowing functionality, and a section on lending functionality. To avoid implying any relative importance of any feature, the general section is arranged alphabetically. Subsections include: archiving records, creating and accessing records, customization, interface with external systems, patron-initiated requesting, pricing, reports and statistics, support of standards, system architecture, target audience, technical and support, and training. The borrowing section is also arranged alphabetically, including: authentication and authorization, communication with patrons, copyright compliance, fines and fees, mediated and unmediated processing, patron and lender records, and printing. The borrowing section ends with a review of the steps of the ILL process: creating patron requests; searching, editing, and sending; and renewals, cancellations, and overdues. The lending section is similarly arranged, beginning with: borrowers records, fees and invoices, mediated and unmediated processing, and printing. The steps of the lending process include: receiving and processing requests; shipping and returning material; status checks, overdues, recalls; and unfilled requests. Not All Products Are Meant To Serve the Same Function This publication includes products developed to meet a range of needs, library types, and library size. Just because a product is not designed to provide a particular feature does not make it less desirable than a product with that feature. …
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.021 |
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".