Faculty members’ perceptions and use of open access journals
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
Open access is a humanitarian movement to ensure equal access to knowledge for each and every member of our society. It aims to reduce the access and knowledge divide and allow researchers from around the world to contribute to enriching human knowledge. Using online surveys, this study attempts to understand Bangladeshi faculty members’ awareness, perceptions, and use of open access journals. It also explores the motivational factors that influence the faculty members to choose open access journals for publication. The study briefly discusses some issues of predatory open access journals in the context of the open access movement. Finally, the paper suggests that libraries work as centres for open access publications and help faculty members and researchers choose the right journals for their research.
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 | 0.018 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.028 | 0.051 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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