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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The E-Book Program Development Study is an ambitious assessment project aimed at gathering essential data to drive the development of policies related to e-book development programs. It aligns with CUL’s mission to support the development and delivery of high-quality services that facilitate research, teaching, and learning across campus and within the wider scholarly community. The results will provide a set of recommendations and policies for internal and external stakeholders as they collaborate on the development and implementation of e-book projects and programs. The objective of the first quarter was to review the e-book landscape at CUL and understand how needs and challenges across campus fit into the larger context of e-book management and collection development within the academic community. To accomplish this objective, the following five tasks were completed: 1. Reviewed the CUL/IS Strategic Plan 2010-2013; 2. Researched and wrote a literature review to examine e-book trends within the academic community and publishing industry; 3. Conducted a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis of
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it