MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W308858671

Cataloguing Commission: SubCommission on ISBD and Music

2011· article· en· W308858671 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFontes artis musicae · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceCommissionPolitical scienceHistoryComputer scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dublin sessions on 25 and 27 July 2011 were the first official meetings of the SubCommission after some informal meetings held in Moscow and some emails exchanged during the year. Most of the important documents concerning the extension of ISBD to unpublished resources were circulated before and during the Dublin conference. The Sub-Commission on ISBD and music met twice, Monday 25 July, attended by 21 people; and on Wednesday 27 July, attended by 16 people. In the first meeting, the chair presented the recent developments of the consolidation process of ISBD and the reasons for the possible extension of the standard to unpublished resources. In 2010, the IFLA Review Group (RG) established a Study Group with the task to draft a proposal; the work was based on a dissertation prepared by Marta Crippa for music manuscripts, and was focused mainly on manuscript resources. The results seem positive, in that in most cases the only changes needed in ISBD consist in avoiding the term publication, deleting the term printed and adding special paragraphs specifying the use of norms for unpublished resources, without contradicting the general principles. The main issues raised consist in new terms for area 0 (Content and media type), left to the decisions of the RG, in controversies in the use of area 4 ( Publication), involving also the possibility to use the area for manuscripts, and in the type of manuscripts where ISBD may be applied, and in the rejection of the initial proposals for areas 2 (Edition) and 6 (Series). A preliminary discussion in the Subcommission concluded the first session, and objections were raised concerning the use of area 8 (Resource identifier) for music incipits. The second session was focused on the structure of the Sub-commission; in order to improve its ability to work across the year, the chair proposed to have--like the SubCommission on UNIMARC--a vice-chair and a secretary, but also to have a larger group of stable members, possibly working in institutions who are active in the IFLA Cataloguing Section. All other IAML members are of course invited to participate actively or as observers and will be informed of the development of the work. The participants agreed, and Daniel Paradis (Bibliotheque et Archives nationales du Quebec, Montreal) kindly volunteered for the position of Vice-chair, while Mary Wedgewood (Library of Congress, Washington) graciously accepted that of Secretary. …

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.134 · 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