Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is little research on the employment of autistic librarians and library support staff, and yet there are many ways in which libraries are a good fit for autistic individuals. As the prevalence of autism grows, academic libraries represent a viable option for meaningful and inclusive employment for autistic employees, provided library managers and administrators create environments that value diversity and inclusion. The main purpose of this study was to obtain information from autistic staff currently or recently employed in academic libraries in Canada about the current difficulties and barriers they experience in the workplace, the opportunities that working in a library gives to autistic employees, and potential accommodations they feel would allow them to excel and thrive in their workplaces. A questionnaire was developed to collect the data, designed to respond to our research questions. Through qualitative analysis we identified the following themes in the survey results: library as unsafe space, social difficulties in the workplace, difficulties requesting accommodations, and a need for improved understanding of autism.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it