MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systems and Methods of Document Delivery in the Foreign Libraries

2021· article· en· W4206989230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena I. Zimina

Bibliographic record

VenueBibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science] · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)World Wide WebReading (process)Digital libraryLibrary classificationProcess (computing)DigitizationComputer scienceWork (physics)National libraryInformation systemAutomationLibrary scienceEngineeringTelecommunicationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the modern digital society, innovative technologies are coming to the fore in the activities of libraries; with their help the libraries can focus on the value of their role in culture and education, meet information needs in the context of digital transformation. At the same time, libraries try to facilitate the work of their employees as much as possible and simplify the efforts of readers in obtaining the necessary literature. This can be achieved by automation of the process of delivery and return of library materials ordered by users within the premises of the library. As a rule, for such purposes there is used telelift — an automated monorail handling system designed for the delivery of goods up to 50 kg (documents, books, magazines, etc.) inside buildings and premises. Telelift is installed in many large libraries, including national libraries in many countries. In addition to telelifts, national libraries use some other document delivery systems. So, the national library of the Netherlands, which is located in one building, has three reading rooms and several storages in the same building, uses the automated storage and retrieval systems of Swisslog company. The article is based on studying the materials of websites of the national libraries, the appeals to the library virtual reference services Ask a Librarian, correspondence with employees of the departments of storage and library and information services of national libraries, as well as additional questionnaire surveys of libraries on the issues related to the storage of library materials. The questionnaire covered the following topics: conducting complete or partial audit, types of audit, use of RFID tags, delivery of material to reading rooms, including, from the remote repositories, the preferred format for issuing a document to the user if this document has a copy (microfilm, microfiche, electronic copy, etc.), as well as statistics of binding and restoration work, ordering necessary materials by readers, etc. The article presents the questionnaire survey responses of the national libraries of Switzerland, Korea, the Royal Library of Netherlands, the British Library, as well as the the Library and Archives of Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0160.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.008

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBibliotekovedenie [Russian Journal of Library Science]Same topicLibrary Science and InformationFrench-language works237,207