MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200080694 · doi:10.6017/ital.v40i3.13209

Rapid Implementation of a Reserve Reading List Solution in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021· article· en· W3200080694 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Technology and Libraries · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineComputer scienceReading (process)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicWorld Wide WebProcess (computing)Online learningReading listLibrary scienceProcess managementMultimediaPolitical scienceBusinessOperating systemMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the spring of 2020, as post-secondary institutions and libraries were adapting to the COVID-19 pandemic, Libraries and Cultural Resources at the University of Calgary rapidly implemented Ex Libris’ reading list solution Leganto to support the necessary move to online teaching and learning. This article describes the rapid implementation process and changes to our reserve reading list service and policies, reviews the status of the implementation to date and presents key takeaways which will be helpful for other libraries considering implementing an online reading list management system or other systems on a rapid timeline. Overall, rapid implementation allowed us to meet our immediate need to support online teaching and learning; however, long term successful adoption of this tool will require additional configuration, engagement, and support.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.295 · 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