Investigating the Persistence of Federal Government Publications in Academic Former Full Depository Libraries in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective – The Depository Services Program (DSP) provided printed Government of Canada publications to libraries until the termination of its distribution program in 2013. Full Depository Libraries (FDLs) received all eligible publications distributed by the DSP automatically. This study endeavours to determine whether academic library members of the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) that were formerly FDLs have maintained their print, federal government holdings since 2013; and what the results of the data collected in this study reveal about access to government information in Canada more broadly. Methods – The study identified a sample of 100 monographs distributed to FDLs via the DSP between 1979 and 2009. Each monograph was then searched for in the public catalogues of former FDL CARL member libraries to determine current holdings. Results – Most libraries included in the sample did not have records of all 100 publications, but every publication was located in at least 5 libraries and 12 publications were found in all libraries included in the study. Of the libraries in our sample, 1/3 had retained more than 90 of 100 publications, and 3/4 had retained at least 80. Conclusion – The redundancy that was a cornerstone of the DSP network still exists to a certain extent and should be leveraged to ensure retention and access to these essential materials for years to come. Existing collaborations and partnerships are well positioned to support a pan-Canadian discussion about preservation of and access to historical federal government information in Canadian libraries and library networks.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.045 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".