MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W33298854 · doi:10.29173/cais848

Deciphering Customer Perceptions of Academic Library Features

2016· article· fr· W33298854 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceQualitative researchPerceptionQualitative analysisSociologyAcademic libraryPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a qualitative analysis of comments made by respondents of a LibQUAL+ survey administered at McMaster University Library by a research team comprising a librarian and a faculty member. The qualitative analysis sheds light on quantitative findings from the survey about customer perceptions of academic library features.Cet article décrit l’analyse qualitative de commentaires formulés par les répondants d'un sondage LibQUAL + administré à la Bibliothèque de l'Université McMaster par une équipe de recherche comprenant un bibliothécaire et un membre du corps professoral. L'analyse qualitative éclaire les résultats quantitatifs de l'enquête sur la perception par les utilisateurs des particularités des bibliothèques universitaires.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.044
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.216 · 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