Proposal for a program action project to plan a Latin American fertility documentation service: a request to the Information Science Division of the IDRC, Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to promote a more adequate utilization of Latin Amerioan population research, CELADE, with the collaboration of CLACSO, has proposed the development of a documentation service organized to meet the needs of Latin America.At first it would treat only fertility, but later would be expanded to other fields of population.The service would accumulate in CELADE all relevant documents, index and abstract them in Spanish, organize the information for retrieval, publish cumulative author, country and detailed subject bibliographies along with the abstracts, and provide copies of the documents on request through a clearinghouse.While the basic structure of the system can be envisioned by CELADE, there are many unknowns to be determined and various choices that must be made among alternatives for which the assistance of specialists are required.To insure that recent advances in population documentation and information retrieval are taken into account when designing the system, CELADE, acting on a suggestion made by the Information Sciences Division of the IDRC, proposes that consultant services of a population documentalist and an information retrieval specialist be provided through a Program Aotion Project (PAP).After analyzing the situation, they would meet with CELADE staff to aid in drawing up a final proposal for the development and operation of the documentation service.
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 | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.175 | 0.036 |
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".