Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Information Justice Institute (IJI) is a project developed at Chicago State University (CSU) in collaboration with community partners. The project brings librarians and community members together to consider key topics and questions to build understanding around critical community needs. This paper reports on two key activities undertaken during the project’s initial phase. First, the preliminary results of a survey launched in 2021 aim to understand the current involvement and potential needs of librarians and other library affiliates in terms of social justice engagement, particularly those related to serving incarcerated people/recently released and their support networks. Second, a webliography developed to support librarians and other community members in growing understanding, strategies, and initiatives to serve diverse populations confronting onerous systemic challenges (e.g., incarceration, poverty, etc.), which are experienced in tandem with limited opportunities for information access and use. The IJI collaboration encouraged dialogue focused on posing questions and grappling with complex issues to grow insights and serve the needs of incarcerated/recently released people and their support networks. This work will likely interest librarians, educators, community leaders, and others working toward justice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".