MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126706105 · doi:10.29173/iasl7605

Effective Use of Open Access Resources in a School Library

2021· article· en· W3126706105 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rashmi Kumbar

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Psychology, and Social Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceEducational resourcesQuality (philosophy)Process (computing)Computer scienceSchool libraryOutcome (game theory)Value (mathematics)Open educational resourcesData collectionWorld Wide WebMedical educationResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementMultimediaPsychologyPedagogyMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an outcome of a study conducted in the Zydus School for Excellence. The major objective of the study being, to create awareness and to promote the use of scholarly and quality educational electronic resources available freely on the web for teaching and learning purpose. The target group was teachers of the school. A questionnaire based method was used to collect the data required for carrying out the study. A comprehensive list of quality resources was also compiled and given to the teachers to find out the scholarly value of the same. The data collected through these two questionnaires has been analyzed and presented. The major learning outcomes of the study have been presented in the last part of the paper. The study clearly reveals that resources available on the web greatly compliment and supplement the print collection. Therefore, there is a need for putting an effort to create a portal of such selected resources to add greater value to the teaching process.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaOpen science
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptScholarly communication
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.164
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Open scienceScholarly communication

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Other design
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicEducation, Psychology, and Social ResearchCategoryOpen scienceFrench-language works237,207