MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221035051 · doi:10.1080/0194262x.2022.2049954

STEM Librarians’ Presence on Academic Profile Websites

2022· article· en· W4221035051 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

VenueScience & Technology Libraries · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb visibility and informetrics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceMetric (unit)Function (biology)Order (exchange)World Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessBiologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores STEM librarians’ presence on academic profile websites (APWs) at American and Canadian research universities. It was found that Google Scholar Citations was the most used APW, followed by ResearchGate, ORCiD, and academia.edu. The rate of profile without a publication list in ORCiD of these librarians was significantly lower than other users across this platform, suggesting that it may be necessary for ORCiD to improve the publication addition function in order to help other users to increase their presence. The social networking functions were not well adopted, as such, ResearchGate’s composite metric, RG Score, adds little new information to bibliometric indicators.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.017
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0090.006
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.219 · 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