“Going with the Flow: New Realities in Technical Services and Serials Management,” Canadian Library Association 2007 Pre-conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On May 23, 2007, approximately forty-five people attended “Going with the Flow: New Realities in Technical Services and Serials Management,” a Canadian Library Association 2007 pre-conference, held at the Delta St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada. The aim of the pre-conference was to provide a forum for speakers and attendees to discuss new realities in the world of technical services and serials management. The pre-conference included a keynote address, a vendor panel, three presentations, and several roundtable discussions. Topics included new ideas about workflows, electronic resource management system (ERMS) issues, Resource Description and Access (RDA), collection budget allocation formulae, and the eight “Rs” human resources report as it relates to technical services. There were also roundtable discussions about serials, acquisitions, and cataloging. Jane Binksma (Ryerson University) convened the pre-conference and introduced speakers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".