MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310289699 · doi:10.32920/21634037.v2

Assessing Scan and Deliver During COVID-19 and Beyond Conference Proceedings

2022· preprint· en· W4310289699 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Levesque, Sanjoy Banerjee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourseworkStaffingService (business)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Metropolitan areaLibrary sciencePlan (archaeology)Political scienceMedical educationBusinessPublic relationsMedicineComputer scienceHistoryNursingMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper was delivered to the Library Assessment Conference in November 2022. Abstract: In the summer of 2020, the Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU) Libraries started a digitization service called Scan and Deliver amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the Library building was closed to patrons with limited on-site staffing, the library provided some access to parts of the print collection when electronic alternatives were unavailable. The Scan and Deliver service allowed patrons to request a portion of text, such as a chapter of a book or journal article, to be scanned by a Library staff member and emailed to them. When the Library building reopened to patrons in Winter 2022 we assessed this service to understand its impact and plan for future service offerings. This paper addresses why Toronto Metropolitan University Libraries patrons have used the Scan and Deliver service: what benefits does it offer them, what role do scanned materials play in their scholarly research, and what barriers does it help them overcome? The results of our assessment show that the Scan and Deliver service has been impactful for patrons. Specifically, students told us it enabled them to complete their coursework and instructors stated that it allowed them to plan coursework and conduct research. The service helped patrons overcome barriers to completing their academic pursuits during the COVID-19 pandemic, including limits related to travel and serious health concerns. The service has also increased access to the collection and patrons describe it as easy to use and convenient. They also noted a few areas for service improvements. Patrons viewed the service as working in conjunction with other library services, such as interlibrary loan and course reserves, as a method of extending access to print. As a result of this analysis Library administration extended the scanning service for an additional year due to its value to patrons, allowing additional time for ongoing assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.018

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207