DESIDOC Journal of Library Information Technology
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
This study explores the publication trends of scholarly papers in DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology from 2010 to 2024. The result showed that 851 articles were published during the study. The study examined various aspects such as the authorship pattern, year-wise distribution of publications, degree of collaboration, author productivity pattern of contribution, year-wise authorship pattern of publication, and category-wise classification of paper contribution. The study identifies the author who published the most articles during the study period. Additionally, the paper analysed the category-wise classification of paper contributions and examined the year-wise distribution of publications. The study revealed the authorship pattern during the study. The study found most articles are contributed by two authors, followed by single and more than three authors. The study also revealed the total number of papers published in the Journal from 2010 to 2024. This bibliometric study provides an in-depth analysis of the DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology (DJLIT) from 2010 to 2024. The co-authored papers dominate the journal’s output, reflecting a collaborative research approach. The journal’s content has evolved to encompass a wide range of topics within LIS, including digital libraries, information retrieval systems, and knowledge management. This thematic diversification aligns with global trends and reflects the journal’s responsiveness to emerging issues. While the majority of contributions are from Indian authors, there is a noticeable increase in international collaborations, particularly from countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. This trend highlights the journal’s expanding global reach and relevance. The DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology has demonstrated significant growth and evolution over the past 15 years.
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 | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.366 | 0.273 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.082 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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