MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562088961 · doi:10.5860/llm.v30i1.7109

Calling all Academic Librarians to Lead!: Developing and Using Inside Talent to Stay Ahead

2015· article· en· W2562088961 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

VenueLibrary Leadership & Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFace (sociological concept)Service (business)Plan (archaeology)Academic libraryLead (geology)Public relationsMedical educationSociologyPsychologyBusinessManagementPolitical scienceComputer scienceLibrary scienceMarketingMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article employs case studies, as well as observations and research findings from the published literature, to explore how sponsored projects and service in professional associations can be used to develop and apply the leadership potential of academic librarians. Tapping into the leadership potential of its librarians can help academic libraries be proactive in the face of change, plan for succession, and retain their professionals.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.065 · 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