MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403774993 · doi:10.1080/15228959.2024.2413508

Establishing an indoor garden and seed library in an academic library

2024· article· en· W4403774993 on OpenAlex
Mikaela Gray, Glyneva Bradley-Ridout, Heather Cunningham, Catherine Duff, Margaret Nevison, Emily Woehrle

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic & Access Services Quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicUrban Agriculture and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic libraryLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoor green spaces are increasing in popularity in many sectors, including libraries. While the benefits for mental health and well-being are well documented, indoor gardens are often cost-prohibitive to establish and maintain, due to infrastructure requirements. This article outlines how an academic health sciences library planned and implemented an indoor garden and seed library with minimal ongoing cost commitments and no permanent space requirements. The initiative has been very well received, and the level of engagement is high. Challenges faced both pre- and post-implementation will be discussed along with future directions for the initiative.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.028
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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