MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916451545 · doi:10.1108/ilds-07-2014-0032

Interlending and document supply: a review of the recent literature: No 87

2014· review· en· W2916451545 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mike McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueInterlending & Document Supply · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityQuarter (Canadian coin)Value (mathematics)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebBusinessLibrary sciencePolitical scienceHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – This paper aims to review the current LIS literature for document supply and related topics. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on the scanning of about 150 journals, reports and websites, blogs etc. Findings – Of great interest this quarter are two studies on journal half-lives which impact on the embargo length debate. Also a study that shows a decline in the free accessibility of journal articles. More on patron-driven acquisition and Big Deals. Originality/value – This is the only regular review of the literature that focuses on document supply and related issues.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterlending & Document SupplySame topicLibrary Collection Development and Digital ResourcesFrench-language works237,207