Search Success at the University of Manitoba Libraries Pre- and Post-Summon Implementation
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
The University of Manitoba Libraries (UML) hired an external company to perform usability testing on its website in 2008 and 2009. A component of the website testing required test participants to find particular books and articles and to identify materials on a particular specific topic using the UML’s search tools. The need for a resource discovery tool was made clear when participants were not generally successful in completing these tasks. The UML released Request for Proposals (RFP) for a resource discovery tool in 2010 and shortly afterward acquired Summon™1 as the successful tool. Usability testing was performed on the Summon™ resource discovery tool while it was still in beta development at UML to see if there was an improvement in search success for students. The results of the two usability studies are described in this chapter, with an emphasis on the Summon™ usability testing and suggestions for further 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.623 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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