Bibliographic record
Abstract
Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association (JCHLA).This transition to a new title and format for our journal is one of the most important steps for the Canadian Health Libraries Association / Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada (CHLA / ABSC) as we continue to move the Association forward.The editorial team of Karen Neves, Andrea Hodgson, and Rebecca Zakoor are to be commended for their efforts in making the new journal a reality.In keeping with the theme of advancing the Association, members have seen the new e-mail service through which the Board can communicate important information directly to each member.We knew that other library associations had this capability, and we were pleased to find that our new secretariat, Associations First, was already using this service for other associations.As we said in our first e-mail, we don't intend to inundate members with messages.But this service does provide us with a wonderful way of getting important and time-sensitive information out to all our members.Members need to be sure that they have a correct e-mail address on file with the secretariat to receive these communications.The secretariat can be reached at info@chla-absc.caor 416-646-1600.I hope everyone has marked May 14-18 in their calendars and plans to attend the CHLA / ABSC annual conference in St. John's, N.L.The Board had a sneak peek at the preliminary program, and it looks fabulous -lots of contributed papers and posters, intriguing keynote speakers, and highly relevant continuing education courses.And the social events promise to keep everyone entertained.Check out the conference Web site (http://www.med.mun.ca/chla2004/) for
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.268 | 0.214 |
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".