Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents an overview of web-scale discovery service adoption in Canadian academic libraries. Web-scale discovery services (WSDS) have been widely embraced in Canadian academic libraries. EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) is the most adopted system for colleges and institutes while Primo Central from Ex Libris dominates the university market for web-scale discovery services. Bundling web-scale discovery services with library services platform (LSP) implementations are increasing in Canada. This study shows that Canadian academic libraries that have migrated from a traditional integrated library system (ILS) to an LSP have also opted for their LSP vendor’s corresponding web-scale discovery service. As more Canadian academic libraries implement an LSP bundled with a web-scale discovery service, there may come a time when web-scale discovery services are no longer separated from discussions on LSPs. The choices available for LSP and web-scale discovery services are shrinking due to vendor mergers and acquisitions in this area.
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 | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".