MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391910016 · doi:10.1080/15228886.2024.2318113

From Authority Work to Wikidata (Via Wikipedia): Implementing a Workflow for Original Catalogers

2024· article· en· W4391910016 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roman Tashlitskyy, Lana Soglasnova

Bibliographic record

VenueSlavic & East European Information Resources · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Council of University LibrariesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceWorld Wide WebWork (physics)Information retrievalDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a practical reflection on how a library cataloger can learn to create Wikidata items based on Slavic language publications, and to maintain the practice as part of the workflow. We describe our experience at the University of Toronto Robarts Library, and the path to adopting a working model for regularly contributing Wikidata items based on the cataloger’s original authority work for NACO.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0190.029
Open science0.0050.012
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.011

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSlavic & East European Information ResourcesSame topicLibrary Science and Information SystemsFrench-language works237,207