MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170570452

A Rough Measure of Copy Cataloging Productivity in the Academic Library

2007· article· en· W2170570452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Buschman, F. William Chickering

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityCatalogingBattleScope (computer science)Quarter (Canadian coin)Value (mathematics)Subject (documents)Library scienceQuality (philosophy)HistorySociologyComputer scienceEconomicsPhilosophyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A benchmark for copy cataloging productivity at a medium-sized academic library was developed in response to management challenges. We posited that too many details have obscured an informative rough productivity benchmark after reviewing local results. Data reviewed in the aggregate over time measured against hours worked produced comparable results in three larger studies.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0260.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln (University of Nebraska)Same topicMedia, Communication, and EducationFrench-language works237,207