MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<b>Where we came from:<i>Uniting a Profession: The Australian Institute of Librarians, 1937–1949,</i>by Jean P Whyte and David J Jones. Canberra: Australian Library and Information Association, 2007. 279pp. $42.50 soft cover ISBN 978086045658</b>

2008· article· en· W2314106763 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Australian Library Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsLibrary of Parliament
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceCover (algebra)PublishingMedia studiesSociologyManagementEngineeringPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(2008). Where we came from: Uniting a Profession: The Australian Institute of Librarians, 1937–1949, by Jean P Whyte and David J Jones. Canberra: Australian Library and Information Association, 2007. 279pp. $42.50 soft cover ISBN 978086045658 . The Australian Library Journal: Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 81-82.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.024
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.219 · 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