MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127337220 · doi:10.29173/iasl7638

Diversified Services of Delivering the Passion of Reading to Campuses

2021· article· en· W3127337220 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chun-Fu Shih

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Promotion (chess)LiteracyClubSchool libraryPrincipal (computer security)Public relationsPolitical scienceLibrary scienceSociologyComputer sciencePoliticsPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Living in a world of television, computer games, and a visual online world, children and books become more distant. Reading habits of the next generation determine the future of the nation. Many nations in the world promote a reading environment, raising reading ability as policy priority. The Kaohsiung Public Library has been the landmark of effortful and proactive promotion of reading in southern Taiwan. In recent years, in order to complement school education, and raise national competency, the Kaohsiung Public Library has, based on the principal of “Customer Center, Proactive and Progressive”, reached out to numerous campuses, providing diversified services to promote and raise the level of literacy of school children. Mayor Ju-lan Ye, a great enhancer and promoter of reading, in addition to founding the “Reading with the Mayor: the Chrysanthemum Reading Club” to read with under-privileged groups, has added 5,000,000 NT dollars to the originally allocated budget for the purchase of books for elementary and middle schools to enrich the library collections. Through the various strategies to promote children’s reading, the Kaohsiung Public Library has disseminated the seeds for reading in every corner of campuses where students can read and enrich their lives in the world of books.

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207