MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389092941 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i1.1823

Artificial Intelligence, Robotics And Its Applications In Green Libraries

2023· article· en· W4389092941 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nitesh Kumar Gupta, Deepak Kumar Namdeo, Dipti Dubey, Subodhini Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoboticsRobotArtificial intelligenceInformation and Communications TechnologyField (mathematics)Service (business)Computer scienceDigital libraryBig dataInformation technologyData scienceEngineering managementKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsEngineeringWorld Wide WebBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technologies and engineering scholars are still debating the prevalence and consequences of ICT (Information and Communications Technology) on every aspect of human life. This line of thinking is shared by experts in the field of library as well as information science/technology, who see opportunities to improve the effectiveness of librarianship via the use of AI and robots. Because of the expanding complexity of the digital environment, the rise in library use, and the urgent need for effective service delivery, this is of the highest significance in the twenty-first century. There is a pressing need to prioritise the incorporation of AI and robots in Green libraries in order to address the problems and difficulties associated with big data, overload of information, and the explosion of information. In light of the facts above, the purpose of this research is to investigate the academic discourse around the integration of AI and robotics-based technologies in knowledge institutions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.070 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207