Scrubbed data on Wikipedians in Residence in Libraries based on the Mapping GLAM-Wiki collaborations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Source: GLAM-Wiki Activities Mapping - Community Review and Feedback Sheet Source's context: Gill, Satdeep. ‘Mapping GLAM-Wiki Collaborations’. This Month in GLAM, March 2020. https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/March_2020/Contents/WMF_GLAM_report. Data was scrubbed using OpenRefine 3.4.1 The original spreadsheet had only partial information in many fields and it is a work in progress (for more see the "source's context" link above). I have only manually double checked those rows in which the “Primary partner institution” contains the stem “libr*” or “bibli*. The following eight rows where modified and “Library” was added in the “Type of institution” column: Municipal Library, Patiala, BRAU Library of the University of Naples Federico II, Library and Archives Canada, Eötvös Loránd University Library and Archives, National Health Library and Knowledge Service, National Doctors Training and Planning, Daniel Cosío Villegas Library, Cantonal and University Library, Nationaal Archief | Koninklijke Bibliotheek; and “Library association” was added to the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) entry. All changes can be seen in the WiRs-in-libraries_MGW_scrubbing-changes.json file in this release.
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 | 0.002 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.035 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.041 |
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".