Bibliographic record
Abstract
credited. Children's publishing in Canada has a relatively short history. The first full-colour Canadian children's book was published in 1968 (1) ) but the literature has grown steadily, bloomed, and thrived. A recent article in Quill & Quire even suggested that we've entered a second golden age of Canadian kidlit (2) . Data from BookNet Canada supports this suggestion; the Canadian Book Market 2013 indicated that the Juvenile market consisted of 33.24% of total sales by volume (3) . According to BNC, this percentage has been increasing for several years, reporting a 4.1% increase from 2013 to 2014 (4) . Some critics might dismiss it as simply the recent trend of adults consuming young adult (YA) fiction, pointing to indicators such as Twilight celebrating 10 years, and countless book-to-screen adaptations like Divergent and Hunger Games . According to Nielsen Market Research, in the first nine months of 2013, YA literature accounted for 18% of children's unit purchases in the US, down from 21% in the same period in 2012, reflecting the impact that the Hunger Games trilogy had on the category in 2012 (5) . However, these anecdotal cases, although supported by some sales data, really only tell part of the story. The other part of the story remains a mystery due to BISAC codes. Book Industry Standards and Communications (BISAC) Subject Headings are used for a number of purposes in publishing, embedded within the metadata of every title. Though they are standardized throughout the industry, categories can be subjectively ascribed based on a specific publisher's list or
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 | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.005 |
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".