Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ARL Statistics 2010–2011 includes data that describe collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 126 members of ARL. Of these 126, 115 are university libraries and 11 are public, governmental, and nonprofit research libraries. ARL member libraries are the largest research libraries in North America, representing 18 Canadian and 108 US research institutions. The academic libraries include 16 Canadian and 99 US libraries, which compose 91 % of the membership. ARL libraries are a relatively small subset of libraries in North America, but they do account for a large portion of academic library resources in terms of assets, budgets, and the number of users they serve. The total expenditures of all 126 member libraries in 2010–2011 were slightly more than $4.6 billion, with approximately $3.2 billion spent by the 115 university libraries and more than $1.3 billion by the nonuniversity libraries. The data collected from ARL member libraries for the ARL Statistics describe a number of trends over the past 25 years. Some of those trends are depicted in the six charts discussed on the following pages.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".