Nurturing the Global Information Commons: Public Access, Public Infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract by C. Hess: \n \n "In considering the development of the World Wide Web, this paper emphasizes the important difference between treating government information as a public service and treating it as a corporate asset. 'Computerization greatly facilitiates the commodification of information,' the author writes. And further 'information is a valuable asset, in computerized form it's especially easy to sell...' \n \n "The author is a Canadian legal scholar. He is concerned primarily on governmental policies in Canada, specifically, British Columbia. 'For example, the B.C. government charges $600 per file for digital maps that cover less area than the paper topographical maps that sell for under $10.' Discussed are the pricing of electronic information, how the government uses the Internet, and the public's use of the Internet in relation to government matters."
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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.
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".