MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075959705 · doi:10.1108/03074800210415032

The library as congenial space: the Saint Mary’s experience

2002· article· en· W2075959705 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

VenueNew Library World · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Product (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)SociologyPower (physics)Fund raisingSAINTLibrary sciencePublic relationsManagementPolitical scienceHigher educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author, appointed University Librarian in 1999, saw that the library was not fulfilling its potential from the perspectives of congenial environment and student awareness. She used student marketing projects to examine perceptions of the Patrick Power Library, and develop ways of raising its profile within the university community. The tired‐looking building, a product of the 1970s, undermined the quality of staff and services. She used the information gathered through the projects to enhance services as well as make the library a more welcoming and vibrant space to attract students, without a major infusion of funds. This article charts the development of the library over a two‐year period.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.241 · 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