MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075824576 · doi:10.1108/01435120810917305

Librarians' skills and qualifications in a modern informational environment

2008· article· en· W2075824576 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michalis Gerolimos, Rania Konsta

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityMeaning (existential)Value (mathematics)Ideal (ethics)SociologyElement (criminal law)Public relationsLibrary scienceMarketingPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceBusinessSocial scienceQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The aim of the research is to investigate the qualifications and the skills of the librarian's profession as they are impressed through the job ads. Design/methodology/approach A total of 200 job advertisements were studied from the UK, Canada, Australia and the USA in 2006 and 2007. The data were derived from known web sites. Findings Overall, 38 skills and qualifications were identified through the job ads. Their percentage of appearance was recorded and this constitutes the basic element for the final findings of this research. Research limitations/implications The research restricted in ads emanated from developed countries' web sites. This methodology records the ideal model of a librarian. Originality/value The research, like others, confirms the meaning of the traditional library science in the modern informational environment.

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)0.012
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations70
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary ManagementSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207