Brugernes blik på Jysk Ordbog:En brugerundersøgelse i leksikografiens tegn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jysk Ordbog (JO) is a historical dictionary that is freely available online at jyskordbog.dk. The process of editing the extensive source material for the dictionary has spanned 90 years, and there is still plenty of work left to do for the editors of JO. The dictionary has existed online since 2000, and from 2000 until 2021 its looks and functionality have remained basically unchanged. As dictionary users’ needs and expectations change over time, a user research-based study of jyskordbog.dk can help shed light on which parts of the online dictionary work well, and which parts need to be revised and updated. This article presents the background for the user research study for JO that took place in 2020-2021, the methods used for the data collection, and the results of the study. I draw connections to past lexicographical user research insights, and I discuss and compare the results concerning layout and functions to other Scandinavian online dictionaries. Suggestions are also presented for how JO can implement useful changes to its online format provided by the insights from the study. <br/><br/>Keywords: user experience research, lexicography, purposive sampling <br/>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".