MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912661920 · doi:10.7202/1055411ar

Publications Exchanges in Distribution

2019· article· en· W2912661920 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jennifer J. Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueMémoires du livre · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingDonationLibrary scienceDistribution (mathematics)Field (mathematics)HistoryPerspective (graphical)SociologyPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expanding the concept of ownership to include distributorship allows consideration of a book route that diverges from circuits often associated with book culture studies. In particular, as this article outlines, organized publications exchanges—which temporarily own and distribute—present opportunities for understanding the spread of books from a different perspective. To demonstrate the research potential of exchanges, the article retraces the path of a single copy of a book over the twentieth century through a continental medical publications exchange, from its donation by the author to a county medical library outside Philadelphia, through its shipment to Toronto where it was housed in two medical libraries, and its brief return to Philadelphia in a personal collection in 2000. As the discussion suggests, this book,The Woman’s Medical College of Pennsylvania, its publication and its subsequent transnational peregrinations, spotlight the field of medicine with respect to contemporaneous trends in medical education, publishing, and library movements.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0170.023
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMémoires du livreSame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207