Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community Involvement Projects in Turkey are volunteer work by students while a faculty member acts as an advisor. A group of Robert College students initiated a project that was to develop a library in another school. Working at RC library made them familiar with all the necessary fields of the profession. They arranged lists of activities for the primary school students like reading or creating stories from pictures. The exercises they tried in their own library, the planning and correspondence they used with other institutions made our students aware of the network around them, developing their social competencies. All learned to work in teams, collaborating with other schools. They became decision makers in selecting sources for a school library. They empathized with other students who had no libraries. Not everything went well, but when problems arose they were able to come to a resolution. It was learning, sharing and teaching with fun.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.019 |
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".