MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095114014 · doi:10.1177/0340035212473089

Academic librarians and research data services: preparation and attitudes

2013· article· en· W2095114014 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIFLA Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Endowment for the HumanitiesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMetadataPreparednessService (business)Public relationsData curationLibrary scienceScholarly communicationBusinessKnowledge managementPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebComputer scienceMarketingPublishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research funding bodies recognize the importance of infrastructure and services to organize and preserve research data, and academic research libraries have been identified as locations in which to base these research data services (RDS). Research data services include data management planning, digital curation (selection, preservation, maintenance, and archiving), and metadata creation and conversion. We report the results of an empirical investigation into the RDS practices of librarians in US and Canadian academic research libraries, establishing a baseline of the engagement of librarians at this early stage of widespread service development. Specifically, this paper examines the opinions of the surveyed librarians regarding their preparedness to provide RDS (background, skills, and education), their attitudes regarding the importance of RDS for their libraries and institutions, and the factors that contribute to or inhibit librarian engagement in RDS.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0100.093
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.198 · 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