MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792963435 · doi:10.1080/19386389.2018.1440922

Disciplinary Metadata in Libraries: A Case Study Applying the ISO 19115-North American Profile (NAP) for Describing Historical Topographic Maps

2017· article· en· W2792963435 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Library Metadata · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Council of University Libraries
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceWorld Wide WebGeoreferenceGeographic information systemTransformative learningDigital libraryData scienceLibrary scienceGeographyCartographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many academic libraries support the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS), offering new ways of interacting with geographic resources online. As these libraries host larger amounts of digital data, including maps and GIS, management and access become increasingly important. This article highlights and analyses the work of a group of Ontario University Libraries to inventory, digitize, georeference, and describe historical maps from the Canadian National Topographic Series. Specifically, we discuss the opportunities and challenges in describing these maps using the ISO 19115 standard, and the resulting access improvements which we argue are transformative for map libraries in the digital age.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.022
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.200 · 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