MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402767029 · doi:10.3998/ticker.6411

Trends in Academic Business Libraries 2022-2023: Highlights from Annual Reports of the Academic Business Library Directors (ABLD)

2024· article· en· W4402767029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenneth J Peterson

Bibliographic record

VenueTicker The Academic Business Librarianship Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This annual survey provides an analysis of the activities, challenges, and advancements reported by American Business Library Directors (ABLD) for 2022-2023. The analysis focuses on new and ongoing initiatives, organizational changes, staff developments, physical space improvements, collection changes, budget issues, vendor issues, business school-related matters, key factors affecting libraries, and other relevant updates. The findings highlight the dynamic nature of business libraries and their continuous efforts to meet the evolving needs of their academic communities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.023
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.009
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.249 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueTicker The Academic Business Librarianship ReviewSame topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207