From Pilot Project to Three FTE: UBC's decentralized repository staffing model
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
In 2011, cIRcle, the University of British Columbia’s open access digital repository, formally accepted a decentralized repository staffing model following a full day planning retreat with key Library stakeholders. Six years later staff has grown to include two FTE Digital Repository Librarians, one FTE support staff, as well as secured metadata review commitments from a Librarian and two cataloguers in Technical Services in addition to regular deposit support from student employees. With increased capacity has come robust and well-documented metadata standards that support interoperability; automated content ingest streams; improved permissions review support to meet growth in faculty requests; streamlined workflows; and strategic content recruitment efforts. This presentation will review how cIRcle evolved from pilot project to top ranking Canadian IR by employing key strategies to advocate for staff allocations that are adaptable to a range of academic institutions. Both successes and failures of cIRcle’s workflows and initiatives using the decentralized model will highlight ongoing challenges of and insights into supporting existing and emerging trends in repository services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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