Libraries and Electronic Resources: New Partnerships, New Practices, New Perspectives
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
* Introduction * The Community Engages: Scholarly Publishing in the Early 21st Century * Symbiosis or Alienation: Advancing the University Press/Research Library Relationship Through Electronic Scholarly Communication * BioOne: A New Model for Scholarly Publishing * The California Digital Library and the eScholarship Program * Perspectives on Scholarly Online Books: The Columbia University Online Books Evaluation Project * Project Euclid and the Role of Research Libraries in Scholarly Publishing * Standards Emerge * Content Standards for Electronic Books: The OEBF Publication Structure and the Role of the Public Sector * Access to Digital Library Collections * The Open Archives Initiative: Realizing Simple and Effective Digital Library Interoperability * Global Consortial Activities * International Library Consortia: Positive Starts, Promising Futures * Licensing Experiences in the Netherlands * The Role of CAUL (Council of Australian Libraries) in Consortial Purchasing * The UK?s National Electronic Site Licensing Initiative (NESLI) * The Canadian National Site Licensing Project * Transforming Teaching and Learning * Library Services Today and Tomorrow: Lessons from iLumina, a Digital Library for Creating and Sharing Teaching Resources * Index * Reference Notes Included
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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