MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401274974 · doi:10.37014/medpus.v31i1.5145

Tren Penelitian Etika dan Hak Cipta dalam Perpustakaan: Analisis Bibliometrik

2024· article· en· W4401274974 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia Pustakawan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology in Education and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusContext (archaeology)Library scienceKey (lock)ChinaCluster (spacecraft)Political scienceWorld Wide WebComputer scienceGeographyMEDLINELaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethics and copyright are significant topics within the context of libraries, as libraries play a crucial role as information regulators. This bibliometric study aims to identify research trends related to ethics and copyright in the library context from 2014 to 2024. Data were obtained from the Scopus database using the query term: "((TITLE-ABS-KEY (copyright AND compliance AND in AND libraries) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (ethical considerations AND for AND librarians) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (access to information AND copyright AND issues))", resulting in 195 documents analyzed using bibliometric tools like Scopus, Vosviewer, and R (Bibliometrix). The research findings indicate that discussions on ethics and copyright in libraries are prevalent in advanced countries with large populations like United States, India, Canada, and China. It is also observed that the number of publications on this topic has declined since 2014 through 2024. Key journals addressing this topic include Library and Philosophy Practice, PLOS One, and the International Journal of Communication System. Dominant keywords in this study encompass human aspects (human, male, female) and regulatory aspects (article, and copyright). Network mapping results show that keywords are divided into 4 main clusters: information processing cluster, academic library & information access cluster, control & copyright cluster, and management cluster

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.014
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.253 · 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