MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W637000585

AUTOMATED WORKSTATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL CATALOGERS: A SURVEY OF ARL LIBRARIES

2015· article· en· W637000585 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sally A. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill UniversityUniversity of California, IrvineUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Notre DameUniversity of OklahomaFlorida State UniversityU.S. National Library of MedicineWayne State UniversitySmithsonian LibrariesYork UniversityVanderbilt UniversitySmithsonian Institution
KeywordsWorkstationComputer scienceLibrary scienceOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A survey of ARL libraries was conducted in the spring of 1988 to determine how many libraries had, or soon would have, individual automated workstations for their professional catalogers. The number of libraries expecting to acquire these workstations at some future time was determined as well. The study also covered: (1) costs and types of equipment being used or considered for this purpose, (2) current and projected uses of automated workstations, and (3) their impact on cataloger productivity, processing costs, and the quality of catalog records.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University)Same topicLibrary Science and Information SystemsFrench-language works237,207