MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065612025

Eine Beispielsammlung für RDA-Katalogisate – Konzept für eine kooperativ geführte Online-Plattform

2017· dissertation· de· W7065612025 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

VenueHdM ePub (Media University Stuttgart) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languagede
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Research methodologyFeminism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Die Umstellung von Regelwerk RAK auf den internationalen Standard RDA bedeutet für Bibliotheksbedienstete eine immense Veränderung. Da Beispiele eine gute Möglichkeit sind, um sich in ein neues System einzulernen, werden in vielen Bibliotheken eigene Beispielsammlungen erstellt. Im Rahmen einer extensiven Umfrage gilt es herauszufinden, wie weit verbreitet die Nutzung interner Beispielsammlungen ist und wie diese aufgebaut sind. Zudem ergründet die Umfrage, ob gesteigertes Interesse an einer Beispielsammlung in Form einer kooperativ geführten Online-Plattform besteht, und wie diese gestaltet sein müsste, um genutzt zu werden. Es werden Möglichkeiten zur technischen Umsetzung einer solchen Beispielsammlung dargestellt, woraufhin ein Konzept für eine derartige Sammlung auf der Basis eines Wikis folgt.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.254 · 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