Intellectual freedom: Waving and wavering across three national contexts
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
The 1999 IFLA Statement on Libraries and Intellectual Freedom makes no explicit distinction between personal and professional ethics, though there are implicit indications that there may be divergence between professional and personal considerations. Across three national contexts (the USA, Canada, and the UK), we explore the gaps between professional and personal ethics, as well as how these gaps have been potentially exploited, addressed, or resolved. There have been waves of debate about intellectual freedom and social responsibility across these three national contexts. In the contemporary age, we see clashes around conceptions of neoliberalism, neutrality, expressive freedom, justice, diversity, equity, inclusion, and anti-racism. The divergence of opinion comes from both the left and the right. The gap between library rhetoric and how it is practiced on the ground in different contexts is visibly shifting and under increased scrutiny, certainly in the USA, Canada, and the UK.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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