MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950081584 · doi:10.18438/eblip29551

More DOIs are Accessed Through Library Discovery Services than Through Google

2019· article· en· W2950081584 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsOntario Council of University LibrariesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld Wide WebComputer scienceWeb trafficLibrary scienceThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Review of: Wang, X., Cui, Y., & Xu, S. (2018). Evaluating the impact of web-scale discovery services on scholarly content seeking. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(5), 545-552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.05.010 Abstract Objective – To examine trends in digital object identifier (DOI) web referrals and explore the referring domains, especially those originating from web-scale discovery systems like ProQuest’s Summon and Primo. Design – Log analysis and web traffic analysis. Setting – CrossRef, a web server that connects DOIs to the corresponding articles’ landing pages. Subjects – Web traffic that passed through CrossRef between 2011 and 2016. Methods – The researchers collected data from CrossRef using a web tool called Chronograph. The data captured information about the websites users were on when they requested a DOI (called the referrer) and about the time and date of each request. The researchers used time series analysis to discover longitudinal patterns in the data. Annual, monthly, and weekly trends were also examined with a seasonal adjustment model, a seasonal trend decomposition, and log transformation. They also isolated traffic from four institutions in Australia, Japan, Sweden, and the United States of America to determine if overall seasonal patterns were reflected locally. ProQuest websites were of particular interest to the researchers because they determined that it had the highest market share of discovery services. Much of the analysis focused on ProQuest’s serialsolutions.com, exlibrisgroup.com, and proquest.com website domains. Main Results – ProQuest servers sent over 25 million DOI referrals through CrossRef – more than either Web of Knowledge (n=24.47 million) or Google (n=15.38 million). Referral traffic grew over the period with the sharpest growth rate occurring between 2011 and 2012. Of ProQuest’s domains, serialsolutions.com (Summon) had more traffic and more growth over the observation period than exlibrisgroup.com (Primo). In all of the years studied, the busiest months were September to November and January to March, while June to August and December were low points. Seasonal fluctuations were attributed to university vacation schedules as demonstrated in the traffic patterns of four ProQuest-subscribing institutions. Weekly trend analysis showed that Monday to Thursday had consistently heavy referral traffic. Of the remaining days, the fewest referrals were observed on Saturdays. Conclusion – DOI referrer traffic is closely tied to the university calendar. Library discovery products are used more frequently to access DOIs than Google.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.856
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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