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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The three previous studies about the suggested retail prices (SRPs) and the new title output of new scholarly books (covering the years 1989–2000; 2000–8; and 2009–11) revealed certain well-defined patterns for books published by university presses and commercial scholarly publishers. During those years, the price for commercial scholarly published books exceeded the SRP for university presses in the humanities, the social sciences, and in the scientific, technical, and medical categories, and commercial presses annually released more than three times the number of scholarly books than university presses did in these major book categories. Were these new title output and pricing trends between 1989 and 2011 also evident in 2012–14? What pricing and marketing theories and practices did commercial scholarly publishers use to enable them to charge higher SRPs than university presses? In a period of economic uncertainty, when far too many university presses face fiscal questions from university trustees and administrators and several presses have been on the verge of closing in recent years, what strategies can university presses utilize to generate more revenues for their books and remain a vitally important part of the entire scholarly publishing ecosystem?
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.154 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it