MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913012473 · doi:10.1002/pra2.2018.14505501149

Post‐checkout (Non‐)usage of Library Digital Content

2018· article· en· W2913012473 on OpenAlexaffabout
Angela Lieu, Dangzhi Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital contentDigital libraryComputer scienceContent managementContent analysisWorld Wide WebMultimediaArtSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The present study analyzed a large urban Canadian public library's data (2013‐2017) from Rakuten OverDrive to identify patterns, trends, and potential implications related to post‐checkout non‐usage (material that is checked out by a user, but subsequently never opened and/or downloaded) of library digital content. It was found that over 12% of the more than 1.1 million checkouts of digital content via OverDrive in 2017 were never opened, causing a waste of over $10,000 USD on metered access eBooks alone; this figure will likely increase in the coming years based on the trends found in this study. Juvenile and non‐fiction eBooks are most likely to be checked out and go unused. These findings may shed light on ways libraries and digital content vendors might improve the efficiency of digital content lending, and serve to inform collection management and user‐targeted marketing and solutions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and TechnologySame topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207