Open Access: Accessibility for the Ivory Tower
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
Open Access (OA) is a growing international movement that encourages the unrestricted sharing of academic research to benefit all communities. OA is the principle that all research should be freely accessible online, immediately after publication, and it's gaining global momentum with the support of funding agencies and policy makers. OA serves communities, supports innovation and development, makes publicly funded research available to taxpayers, and provides essential information to low income populations. \n \nLibrarians have played an important role in the OA movement. Learn how Memorial University of Newfoundland is connecting communities with knowledge by disseminating research through several OA initiatives, and learn how to make your own research more accessible. \n \nLisa Goddard, Memorial University's Scholarly Communications Librarian, will provide information about its research repository, ejournal hosting platform, and OA author's fund. Humanities Research Librarian, Kathryn Rose, will share her experience of collaborating with students and faculty to start an OA ejournal, and provide tips for attendees interested in creating an OA journal of their own. Copyright Liaison Librarian, Crystal Rose, will discuss the benefits of OA for communities, what university and government policy makers worldwide are doing to support OA mandates (and how Canada is lagging behind), how publishers have responded to the OA movement, and what you can do to advocate for OA within your institution or organization.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Scholarly communicationOpen science Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
| gpt | Scholarly communicationOpen science Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it