MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Collaboration in Editorship

2014· book-chapter· en· W2496404889 on OpenAlexaffabout
Luisa Marquardt, Dianne Oberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in library and information science (ALIS) book series · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceSchool libraryGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceWork (physics)Section (typography)SociologyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter presents a year-long collaboration by two editors, one in Italy and one in Canada, that resulted in 2011 the IFLA Publication No. 148, titled Global Perspectives on School Libraries: Projects and Practices. Supporting the work of the two editors were the members of the Joint Committee of two international school library groups, the School Libraries and Resource Centers Section of the International Association of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA SLRC) and the International Association of School Librarianship (IASL), and the staffs of IFLA Headquarters and of IFLA’s publisher, De Gruyter Saur. The 300-page book included 30 chapters, written by 50 authors from 20 countries across 6 continents. The topics addressed in the book included: school library education and implementation models; promoting literacies through the school library; school libraries for all; expanding the reach of the school library through technology; government initiatives for school library development; and organizations for school library advocacy and development. The whole process—from designing the publication to disseminating it—is described, including some lessons learned along the way, useful for planning joint work of a similar nature. Future steps in the collaboration between the IFLA SLRC Section and IASL collaboration are introduced as well.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.934
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in library and information science (ALIS) book seriesSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207