MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310102555 · doi:10.29173/iasl8539

What the Shelves Aren't Saying

2022· article· en· W4310102555 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alissa Tudor, Jennifer Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensorshipCensoring (clinical trials)Intellectual freedomMedia studiesPolitical scienceSociologyAdvertisingHistoryPublic relationsInternet privacyLawBusinessComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Censorship attempts in libraries have been occurring since the 1850s, with variations in frequency (Steele, 2020). Recently, school libraries in America have experienced a significant increase in censorship attempts, particularly around books about BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ issues and experiences (ALA, 2021). Efforts range from Texas politicians’ inquiries and accusations about school library collections to individual citizens and private groups nationwide flooding libraries with book challenges. Not all attempts to censor, however, are external; some acts of censorship occur as perceived preventative measures. Fear of a potential challenge can sometimes result in a librarian self-censoring when developing the collection (Hill, 2010).

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207