Welcome to Information Science Sponsored by <scp>SIG‐HFIS</scp>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This panel engages conference attendees in the history and foundations of information science and provides an opportunity to reflect upon our field's current and future identity(s). It enacts the following scenario: At an orientation event for an information science program a spokesperson gives incoming students a brief address on the theme, “Welcome to information science.” Six imaginative but authentic versions of that talk are offered here. To showcase the variety of approaches to information science across the past century, each disquisition is inspired by the work of one luminary, namely: Paul Otlet, S. R. Ranganathan, Jesse H. Shera, Elfreda Chatman, and Marcia J. Bates. In an effort to encourage a more spacious information science, an indigenous perspective on ways of knowing is also included. Attendees to this session will time‐travel across almost 100 years of information science history and ultimately rest in the reality of a multi‐perspective discipline.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it