Bibliographic record
Abstract
Streaming media licensing by academic libraries has, in recent decades, grown in breadth and complexity. Simultaneously, in the communication and media studies community, critical analysis of consumer-direct streaming media or over-the-top (OTT) platforms has explored media ownership and power dynamics. This article intends to bridge the gap between these two worlds and reframe the discourse of research into modern library analysis, turning away from the “how” media gatekeeping is being experienced by academic librarians and towards “what” media is being withheld. The analysis will be done through a case study of a collection, or rather, absence of collection, of films requested but unavailable for institutional licensing in a specific Canadian academic library. In exploring request, film, and market availability data for each title and analyzing trends found therewithin, the article aims to bring to light possible implications to the future of academia as technological advancements and media powerholders render certain audiovisual cultural artifacts inaccessible.
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 | 0.072 | 0.277 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.040 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.007 |
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".