MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020888257 · doi:10.5860/crln.81.5.232

Virtual cohorts: Peer support and problem-solving at a distance

2020· article· en· W3020888257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amy Tureen, Erick Lemon, Joyce Martin, Starr Hoffman, Mindy Thuna, Willie Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueCollege & Research Libraries News · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningCohortPublic relationsPeer supportPeer reviewPolitical scienceComputer scienceSociologyPsychologyPedagogyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common challenge for administrative leaders in academic libraries is that we often have few peers within our organizations, and those that we do have may not be able to provide the dispassionate, unbiased feedback we need. The authors of this article, library leaders from across the United States and Canada, formed a virtual cohort for peer leader support and have found it to be transformative in approaching leadership challenges at our home institutions.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.017
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollege & Research Libraries NewsSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207