Controlled Access and Availability: A Conundrum in Academic Libraries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the University of Calgary librarians' concerns regarding access policies for atypical items the relevant literature was examined and Canadian universities surveyed. Operating within the specific university context and the general principle of maximization of access and availability, guiding principles and specific criteria were developed for four categories of atypical items.En réponse à l’inquiétude des bibliothécaires de l’Université de Calgary au sujet des politiques d’accès des items atypiques, la littérature pertinente a été examinée et les universités canadiennes ont été étudiées. Opérant à l’intérieur du contexte universitaire spécifique et du principe général de maximisation de l’accès et de la disponibilité, des principes directeurs et des critères spécifiques ont été développés pour quatre catégories d’items atypiques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.111 | 0.260 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".