MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312548480 · doi:10.5860/crl.65.4.334

Toward a New Venture: Building Partnerships with Faculty

2004· article· en· W2312548480 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCollege & Research Libraries · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsManitoba Health
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsGeneral partnershipQuality (philosophy)Public relationsUniversity facultySociologyHigher educationLibrary sciencePolitical scienceMedical educationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In spring 2000, the authors undertook a study to examine the extent of collaboration between librarians and faculty at the University of Manitoba and to identify the current and future roles of librarians. Two surveys were designed—one directed at faculty, the other at librarians. The current article reports the results of the librarian survey and presents some comparative data between the two surveys. This study demonstrates the extent to which their opinions intersect and examines the quality of the partnership. It measures the impact of the collaboration and describes areas where it could be enhanced and expanded. In addition, the study identifies new roles for librarians that would further enhance the partnership between faculty and librarians.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.023
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.269
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.140 · 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