MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244103075 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14639820

The library as congenial space: the Saint Mary’s experience

2021· preprint· en· W4244103075 on OpenAlexaff
Madeleine Lefebvre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Product (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)Power (physics)SociologySAINTPerceptionFund raisingPublic relationsLibrary sciencePolitical scienceHigher educationPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author, appointed University Librarian in 1999, saw that the library was not fulfilling its potential from the perspectives of congenial environment and student awareness. She used student marketing projects to examine perceptions of the Patrick Power Library, and develop ways of raising its profile within the university community. The tired-looking building, a product of the1970s, undermined the quality of staff and services. She used the information gathered through the projects to enhance services as well as make the library a more welcoming and vibrant space to attract students, without a major infusion of funds. This article charts the development of the library over a two-year period.

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 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, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207