MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393987348 · doi:10.1080/10572317.2024.2337605

Change is the Only Constant: Libraries After COVID Pandemic

2024· article· en· W4393987348 on OpenAlexaff
Charlotte Innerd, Annie Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Information & Library Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicContext (archaeology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Work (physics)Public relationsSubject (documents)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Political science2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSociologyLibrary scienceHistoryEngineeringMedicineComputer scienceVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While change is a constant in libraries, this article will explore the changes that have occurred and may yet be discovered following the COVID pandemic. 2020 has been referred to as the year the Earth stood still. Yet for libraries, it was a year of tremendous change with quick adaptations in order to support our student and faculty populations while seeking to preserve the safety and health of library colleagues. The authors will explore what external factors are driving the post-pandemic changes, the practices that were standard that no longer work, and emerging changes in practices. While the authors work in a North American context as well as in academic and research library context, they will explore literature from around the world. The authors bring their experience as library leaders and subject expertise to the consideration of the impact of the pandemic on library efforts and operations.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0160.020
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Information & Library ReviewSame topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207