Bibliographic record
Abstract
WHO NEEDS TRAINING? Every organization within the DAISY Consortium will require staff members who are trained in the creation of DAISY Digital Talking Books (DTB). In order to facilitate this huge undertaking a fully trained group of experts must be cultivated. Thus, the goal of the DAISY training program is to develop experts in the production and distribution of DAISY Digital Talking Books within all organizations in the DAISY Consortium. It is envisioned that these experts will then train the staff within their own organizations. Currently, there are few people who can be classified as Those few individuals who have devoted much of their time to help develop the standards and evaluate, test and advance the production software are qualified to be called experts. One of the initial tasks of this training program is to identify within each organization one or more people who have the potential to become experts. Another fundamental task is to determine how best to build and communicate the body of knowledge contained in the DAISY Consortium. In order to be an expert in the DAISY system, one must have knowledge of the DAISY specifications, the Structure Guidelines, XML, LpStudio/Pro (the authoring and recording software), and knowledge of the capabilities of the playback systems. Once a trainer understands these components and their interrelations, he or she can be classified as an expert. This is not a trivial endeavor, and to be successful the support mechanisms will need to be extensive. STRATEGY FOR WORLDWIDE TRAINING AND SUPPORT Developing expertise in every organization is the focus of the strategy for implementing a worldwide training and technical support program. Communication between existing experts and those on the road to becoming experts is key. For this reason, each organization has been encouraged to assign their key technical personnel to become participants of the & Technical Support Work Team (T&TS). It is this work team lead by Edmar Schut, SVB Netherlands, and Lynn Leith, CNIB Canada, that is charged with developing the strategy, goals, and implementation plans for the DAISY Consortium's training program. The training program is based on worldwide communication mechanisms, as outlined in the following paragraphs. EXPERTS TRAINING & TECHNICAL SUPPORT DISCUSSION LIST Experts and potential experts must be able to communicate easily and freely at any hour of the day or night, as there are participants literally around the world. The T&TS email discussion list provides this mechanism. Every member organization has one or more of its key people assigned to this team and registered on this list. It is here that proposals evolve, questions are answered, and problems posted to the most knowledgeable people in the world in the production of DAISY DTBs. It was here that volunteers came forward to participate in the testing of the LpStudio/Pro software. Others volunteered to help in the development of the Training used in the Train the Trainers program at regional centers. It will be here that difficult questions will be posted and through discussion, resolved. No person should feel alone, regardless of how far he or she may be from other producing sites with so many experts a simple email away. REGIONAL TRAINING CENTERS At the heart of Training and Technical Support is the concept of a Regional Training Center. Any DAISY Consortium member can establish itself as a regional training center. This is voluntary and the amount of service provided is dependant upon the regional training center's committed resources. It is expected that these centers will provide support to trainers in their geographical or language region. The regional training centers must have at least one expert trainer who can conduct training courses offered at that center. The Basic Training Course must be available from all training centers. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.179 | 0.087 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".