Information Policy and Intellectual Freedom In American Libraries Before and After September 11, 2001: A Global Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines information policy in libraries before and after the tragic destruction of the Twin Towers in New York, New York, on September 11, 2001. It carefully considers libraries’ role in the history of intellectual freedom in the United States and on an international scale. It investigates the rocky road that citizens from almost all countries have traveled in attempting to gain open access to information throughout modern history. It appraises some of the advances certain areas of the world have made in regard to intellectual freedom. The paper also investigates some areas of the world that are still confronting various degrees of censorship today. The paper then discusses the effect September 11, 2001 had on intellectual freedom and libraries. It scrutinizes the USA Patriot Act that was quickly passed in the United States in response to the terrorist attack. In addition, the paper explores other legislation from around the world that was enacted in direct reply to September 11, 2001.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.031 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".