Work-to-Work Bibliographic Relationships from FRBR Point of View: A Canadian Perspective
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
This study examines bibliographic relationships between Canadian publications published in 2009 available in AMICUS (Canadian National Catalogue). It consisted of categorizing bibliographic relationships in the taxonomy of work-to-work relationships available in the FRBR Final Report. The study indicates frequencies of occurrences of bibliographic relationships based on manifestations found in AMICUS.Cette étude examine les relations bibliographiques entre les documents canadiens publiés en 2009 et répertoriées dans AMICUS (le catalogue national du Canada). L’objectif était de catégoriser les relations bibliographiques suivant la taxinomie des relations entre une œuvre et une œuvre disponible dans les SFNB : Rapport final. L’étude présente les fréquences d’occurrences de relations bibliographiques selon les manifestations trouvées dans AMICUS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.054 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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