MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6912553257 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3608577

17. UK Research Reserve – the journey of de-duplication continues

2016· article· en· W6912553257 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Work (physics)Economic shortageScarcityQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As technologies continue to help libraries innovate how they operate, both librarians and users want to provide/receive new services and in ways that hadn’t been possible in the past. It represents great opportunities in many areas, but in reality, changes come with challenges. One of the key challenges is the shortage of space as research libraries have accumulated a lot of items over the years and often the solution is to acquire more and bigger buildings to keep them. To tackle this issue, libraries in the UK work together to identify scarce material for retention and release space by disposing of widely available holdings. By deaccessioning through the UK Research Reserve (UKRR), participating libraries have the confidence that they are making informed decisions and are ensured that research material is preserved and remains accessible (one copy would be kept by UKRR’s partner, the British Library [BL], as the access copy and two copies would be retained by member libraries as preservation copies.) This membership model is essential as it determines if an item is available through the BL’s document delivery services and whether it is scarce or not. This model has worked well and has helped release about 85km of shelf space during UKRR Phase 2. However, this membership model also means that only about 18% of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the UK have access to UKRR services. With financial support from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), UKRR aims to open its door to all, within and beyond the HE sector, and invite any library who wishes to de-duplicate their holdings to join the programme. To be able to do so, it is crucial to identify new homes for preservation copies if offering libraries are not committed to retain for the community. By introducing a new role (Preservation Library), the new model offers all libraries an opportunity to dispose of material responsibly and in an informed manner. More importantly, it also ensures that at a time of constant change, research resources that the UK has accumulated for centuries remain accessible to the research community. Through the poster event, we want to tell the UKRR story and its transition so far. We also want to share thoughts with delegates and learn from their experience.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.201 · 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