Research on Resource Integration and Intelligent Recommendation Mechanism of Digital Library under Big Data Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today’s big data environment, the demand for digital transformation of traditional libraries is becoming more and more urgent. The article adopts BERT-BiLSTM-CRF model to extract digital library resources and retrograde entities, and constructs digital library resources knowledge graph. On the basis of digital library resources integration, it combines the collaborative filtering algorithm based on users and items to construct and improve the intelligent recommendation mechanism of digital book resources. The integration results of digital library resources and intelligent recommendation results are analyzed separately, and a survey on reader satisfaction is conducted. The recognition accuracy of this paper’s method is significantly higher than that of the traditional text-like processing data model. The collaborative filtering algorithm in this paper provides statistical analysis of the types of book resources read by each reader, and recommends the top 5 book types in terms of similarity to him/her. This paper’s method has better results in book resource division and book resource recommendation accuracy compared to other recommendation methods. The average value of readers’ satisfaction with the resource recommendation mechanism of the digital library in S city for each dimension and each index is more than 4 points.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".