MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075682129 · doi:10.1300/j111v46n03_12

Libraries and Google Co-op

2008· article· en· W2075682129 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Library Administration · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health AuthorityVancouver Aquarium
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)World Wide WebSearch engineSearch engine optimizationComputer scienceWeb search engineWeb crawlerFeature (linguistics)Web search query

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Google has recently introduced Google Co-op, a platform which is comprised of three different tools: custom search engine, subscribed links, and topics. The custom search engine and subscribed links features of Google Co-op are being used successfully by a variety of different businesses and libraries to help harness the power and size of the Web. Other organizations are contributing to specific search areas designed by Google using the topics feature. By examining the ways that such organizations are using Google Co-op and by demonstrating how to use custom search engines and topics, the article draws some conclusions about the potential usefulness of Google Co-op's features for libraries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.015
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.222
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