MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035195087 · doi:10.3138/jsp.51.4.04

Continuity of Academic Library Services during the Pandemic The University of Toronto Libraries’ Response

2020· article· en· W3035195087 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic libraryLibrary scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicDigital librarySpecial collectionsWorld Wide WebSociologyComputer scienceMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The suspension of in-person services and loss of access to physical collections at the University of Toronto’s network of academic libraries has left more than 100,000 students, staff, and faculty with only remote library support available for their research. Leveraging and expanding existing online services and digital collections, and acquiring or building new research tools for scholars to deploy, are two approaches the University of Toronto Libraries’ staff have taken since the COVID-19 pandemic changed library operations. This paper describes the continuity of library services and collections access at the University of Toronto during the period of March, April, and May of 2020 and briefly considers how these services may evolve moving forward.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.157
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.227 · 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