MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Greening libraries: India vs International Scenario

2016· article· en· W2616895443 on OpenAlexaffabout
Reshma Rana

Bibliographic record

VenueGyankosh- The Journal of Library and Information Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsShastri Indo-Canadian Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreeningLibrary scienceBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concept of Green Libraries is gradually is attracting library administrators world over and its need and efforts to develop green libraries are on rise. This is becoming a kind of movement now and has started gaining momentum in India as well though it initially started with USA, UK and Canada who are leading countries to adopt the concept. The present paper focuses on the state of affairs about green libraries development in India and other developing countries. LEED is the major performance standard in countries abroad and IGBC is an Indian standard to measure the performance. The attempt is made to understand the concept, role of various associations and training available on green libraries, existing standards to measure the performance and pros and cons of the green libraries in general.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.051
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGyankosh- The Journal of Library and Information ManagementSame topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207