MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598930568 · doi:10.1108/lhtn-02-2017-0008

What’s trending in libraries from the internet cybersphere – artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies

2017· article· en· W2598930568 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary Hi Tech News · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityQuarter (Canadian coin)The InternetWorld Wide WebComputer scienceColumn (typography)Information literacyValue (mathematics)Data scienceSociologyHistorySocial scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The article is the first for this column for 2017. It is full of information mainly from blogs and wikis. The aim of the article is to highlight trends in technology in libraries as posted on the blogs and wikis. Design/methodology/approach The methodology used is that of getting the most trending news from the wikis and blogs in the first quarter of the year and reporting on them. Findings The projections for the year are emphasized moving from artificial intelligence to information literacy. Originality/value These are the trends projected from the internet cybersphere. It sure is trending!

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.017
Open science0.0040.002
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.214 · 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