Bibliographic record
Abstract
I will report on my participation at both the WILU and CLA conference activities. \n \nI attended the WILU conference in Montreal May 25 – 27, 2009. Both theoretical models and concrete ideas of information literacy projects were presented that may translate well to the delivery of library services at AU Library. These will inform the new information literacy duties which I will be assigned in the coming months. While at the conference, I was selected to co-convene the Information Literacy Interest Group (ILIG) of CLA. This is meant as a transitional position to becoming convener within the year. This increases my personal involvement in this area of information literacy as well as the profile of Athabasca University Library in this area of librarianship. \n \nOn May 29, 2009 at the CLA Conference and Trade Show, I set up my display booth with bilingual handouts and two posters, one French and one English. I was present at my booth during the conference’s trade show opening 10:30 am Sat. May 30th, various times throughout the weekend, and during the required times on Sunday May 31st. I feel the presentation was successful as I had contact with over 100 people during the weekend. Comments included that the presentation was extremely professional and the research encompassed fresh ideas. To my surprise, mine was the only fully translated presentation, a point well appreciated by the national audience. Many people contributed additional information about unexpected locations of libraries around the world, such as on camels or in taxi cabs. Discussions were also raised in areas of further research. I look forward to continuing my research. \n \nInterestingly, as I’m sure is not a surprise to anyone on the A&PDF committee, about 25% of the questions I answered were about the uniqueness of Athabasca University and AU Library. This is an indirect positive outcome of my professional participation at this event. \n \nWhile at the CLA conference, I attended many sessions on information technology and open source options for libraries, which will directly inform my work with AU Library. \n \nAs well, I co-facilitated a breakfast meeting of the national Information Literacy Interest Group (ILIG). This was my first meeting as co-convener of ILIG. \n \nI feel my attendance at both conferences exceeded my expectations of success, and will closely inform my work at AU Library over the next year. \n \nThese posters cannot be posted to AU Space, as I do not have the legal permissions for electronic distribution of photos that I took of travel operations or hotels. I hold copyright of each photo, and could lawfully present these photos in person during the educational presentation at CLA. I do not have permission to distribute them. \n \nThank you for the support of these professional endeavors and you continued work with the APDF Committee.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".