Recent lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender fiction for teens: are Canadian public libraries providing adequate collections?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyzes selected Canadian public libraries' holdings of young adult fiction with gay, lesbian, bisexual and/or transgender content published between 1998 and 2002 in order to measure access to such fiction and to determine whether any evidence of bias on the part of selectors exists. Identifies 35 titles published between 1998 and 2002, a slight decrease from the previous five‐year period. These titles attracted 34 percent fewer reviews per title as compared to a randomly selected control group of non‐lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender fiction for teens (LGBT) titles. On average, in the nine Canadian public libraries studied, significantly fewer copies of each LGBT title were held, as compared to the list of control titles. Without further investigation, the paper could not conclude whether this difference constitutes evidence of significant bias on the part of selectors. However, the data do show that certain libraries are significantly more likely to purchase the control titles that the LGBT titles, and that access to these titles varies according to one's location in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it