First, can you copyright the output of a generative AI model, and if so, who owns it? Second, if you own the copyright to the input used to train an AI, does that give you any legal claim over the model or the content it creates? Once these questions are answered, an even larger one emerges: how do you deal with the fallout of this technology? What kind of legal restraints could—or should—be put in place on data collection? And can there be peace between the people building these systems and those whose data is needed to create them?
Minitex is seeking a librarian who is innovative, relationship-focused, and service-oriented to develop, lead, and support an initiative to coordinate efforts around Open Education Resources (OER) and affordable content work in Minnesota and the Minitex region, as well as to contribute to cost-saving measures of Minitex cooperative purchasing services. . . . The position will lead in building and implementing the Minitex OER action plan and will help to evolve Minitex-led programs like Minnesota Libraries Publishing Project and MN Writes MN Reads.
The trouble is, the types of data typically used for training language models may be used up in the near future—as early as 2026, according to a paper by researchers from Epoch, an AI research and forecasting organization, that is yet to be peer reviewed. The issue stems from the fact that, as researchers build more powerful models with greater capabilities, they have to find ever more texts to train them on. Large language model researchers are increasingly concerned that they are going to run out of this sort of data, says Teven Le Scao, a researcher at AI company Hugging Face, who was not involved in Epoch’s work.
This Administrative Faculty position plays a crucial role in providing online user access to Library materials, including the maintenance and troubleshooting of electronic resource holdings and access, supporting online access and virtual user experience, monitoring and troubleshooting integrations with the Alma Library Services Platform (LSP), gathering usage statistics and evaluating the accessibility of e-resources.
Journal policies continuously evolve to enable knowledge sharing and support reproducible science. However, that change happens within a certain framework. Eight modular standards with three levels of increasing stringency make Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines which can be used to evaluate to what extent and with which stringency journals promote open science. Guidelines define standards for data citation, transparency of data, material, code and design and analysis, replication, plan and study pre-registration, and two effective interventions: "Registered reports" and "Open science badges", and levels of adoption summed up across standards define journal’s TOP Factor. In this paper, we analysed the status of adoption of TOP guidelines across two thousand journals reported in the TOP Factor metrics. We show that the majority of the journals’ policies align with at least one of the TOP’s standards, most likely "Data citation" (70%) followed by "Data transparency" (19%). Two-thirds of adoptions of TOP standard are of the stringency Level 1 (less stringent), whereas only 9% is of the stringency Level 3. Adoption of TOP standards differs across science disciplines and multidisciplinary journals (N = 1505) and journals from social sciences (N = 1077) show the greatest number of adoptions. Improvement of the measures that journals take to implement open science practices could be done: (1) discipline-specific, (2) journals that have not yet adopted TOP guidelines could do so, (3) the stringency of adoptions could be increased.
Our Data Curation & Scholarly Communication Librarian contributes to various digital initiatives at Rowan University Libraries, including Rowan Digital Works (RDW), Rowan’s research institutional repository. This includes the library Open Access Publication Fund, as well as strategic initiatives and partnerships to promote Open Scholarship more broadly.
Values and principles provide a scaffold for community governance of the knowledge commons, engaging stakeholders in the construction of a system that encourages participants to adhere to a shared set of ethical and functional practices. This article introduces the FOREST Framework for Values-Driven Scholarly Communication, a toolkit and approach developed by the Next Generation Library Publishing project to assess a community or organization’s alignment with scholarly values and principles. The article situates the FOREST Framework within the context of other initiatives advancing values-based scholarly communication and explains the importance of assessment mechanisms as a core element in governing an equitable and sustainable knowledge commons. It also synthesizes the findings of a half-day summit hosted in February 2022 that convened representatives of values-and-principles-based frameworks and initiatives in scholarly communication to strategize a collective future for these efforts.
This position will provide leadership and management to a re-envisioned division and build on the strong foundation already established to support technology services, emerging scholarship, and engagement in the research enterprise. The division portfolio currently includes Digital Initiatives and the institutional repository called STARS, LibTech technology lending, scholarly communication, web services, technology spaces in the John C. Hitt Library, and a liaison role with central UCF Information Technology.
Policy makers produce digital records on a daily basis. A selection of records is then preserved in archival repositories. However, getting access to these archival materials is extremely complicated for many reasons—including data protection, sensitivity, national security, and copyright. Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be applied to archives to make them more accessible, but it is still at an experimental stage. While skills gaps contribute to keeping archives ‘dark’, it is also essential to examine issues of mistrust and miscommunication. This article argues that although civil servants, archivists, and academics have similar professional principles articulated through professional codes of ethics, these are not often communicated to each other. This lack of communication leads to feelings of mistrust between stakeholders. Mistrust of technology also contributes to the barriers to effective implementation of AI tools. Therefore, we propose that surfacing the shared professional ethics between stakeholders can contribute to deeper collaborations between humans. In turn, these collaborations can lead to the building of trust in AI systems and tools. The research is informed by semi-structured interviews with thirty government professionals, archivists, historians, digital humanists, and computer scientists. Previous research has largely focused on preservation of digital records, rather than access to these records, and on archivists rather than records creators such as government professionals. This article is the first to examine the application of AI to digital archives as an issue that requires trust and collaboration across the entire archival circle (from record creators to archivists, and from archivists to users).
The proportion of deaths among those 65 or older has fluctuated from eight out of 10 in the first few months of the pandemic, to a low of 6 out of 10 when the delta wave struck in the summer of 2021, to a high of 9 out of 10 today. . . . Last month [October], people 85 and older represented 41.4 percent of deaths, those 75 to 84 were 30 percent of deaths, and those 65 to 74 were 17.5 percent of deaths, according to a Post analysis. All told, the 65-plus age group accounted for nearly 90 percent of covid deaths in the United States despite being only 16 percent of the population.
The Librarian contributes to implementation, policies, and procedures in relation to the discovery and visibility of the professional and personal research assets of Drexel University faculty and researchers through the Libraries’ information management platforms including Esploro, Primo VE, Alma/Alma Digital, and ArchivesSpace, as well as through Google Scholar and other non-library discovery systems.
Learning to play Diplomacy is a big deal for several reasons. Not only does it involve multiple players, who make moves at the same time, but each turn is preceded by a brief negotiation in which players chat in pairs in an attempt to form alliances or gang up on rivals. After this round of negotiation, players then decide what pieces to move—and whether to honor or renege on a deal.
Working closely with colleagues in Library Technology & Discovery Services and across library units, this role will evaluate the web experience for patrons and staff, guide the implementation of solutions and recommendations for BU Libraries web sites through content strategy and information architecture.
"One Nation, One Subscription" (ONOS) is a scheme of the Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India. The letter from the ministry’s Department of Higher Education said the government will negotiate with journal publishers for "all people in India" to have access to journal articles under a single centrally negotiated payment to be made by the government.
The Purdue Libraries seek an Assistant Professor who will join a vibrant group of faculty in the Purdue University Libraries and School of Information Studies to teach and apply innovative digital methods to humanistic research questions. The faculty member will teach courses that contribute to the Libraries’ co-sponsored graduate and undergraduate certificates in Digital Humanities; support and partner with faculty and students on DH research and teaching projects; and collaborate with University units and centers to leverage campus resources to apply toward digital projects.
The Open Science movement is a response to the accumulated problems in scholarly communication, like the "reproducibility crisis", "serials crisis", and "peer review crisis". The European Commission defines priorities of Open Science as Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reproducible (FAIR) data, infrastructure and services in the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC), Next generation metrics, altmetrics and rewards, the future of scientific communication, research integrity and reproducibility, education and skills and citizen science. Open Science Infrastructure is also one of four key components of Open Science defined by UNESCO.
Mainly represented among Open Science Infrastructures are institutional and thematic repositories for publications, research data, software and code. Furthermore, the Open Science Infrastructure services range may include discovery, mining, publishing, the peer review process, archiving and preservation, social networking tools, training, high-performance computing, and tools for processing and analysis. Successful Open Science Infrastructure should be based on community values and responsive to needed changes. Preferably the Open Science Infrastructure should be distributed, enabling machine-actionable tools and services, supporting reusability and reproducibility, quality FAIR data, interoperability, sustainability, long-term preservation and funding.
Here, we define, categorize and discuss barriers to data and code sharing that are relevant to many research fields. We explore how real and perceived barriers might be overcome or reframed in the light of the benefits relative to costs. By elucidating these barriers and the contexts in which they arise, we can take steps to mitigate them and align our actions with the goals of open science, both as individual scientists and as a scientific community.
The Discovery & eResources Management Librarian coordinates access and discovery to the UMass Libraries’ electronic collection. In collaboration with the DRMS unit, manage the integrations between the discovery platform, the link resolver, the proxy service, the library services platform, and other related systems.
In this policy position paper, we outline current open science practices and key bottlenecks in their broader adoption. We propose that national science agencies create a digital infrastructure framework that would standardize open science principles and make them actionable. We also suggest ways of redefining research success to align better with open science, and to incentivize a system where sharing various research outputs is beneficial to researchers.
The Digital Curation and Metadata Librarian leads in the development, curation, sustainability, and expansion of digital scholarship across the campus research and creative community. The Digital Curation and Metadata Librarian also identifies and develops opportunities to support preservation and discoverability of digital content in the Broome Library’s systems.
This open access collection of AI ethics case studies is the first book to present real-life case studies combined with commentaries and strategies for overcoming ethical challenges. Case studies are one of the best ways to learn about ethical dilemmas and to achieve insights into various complexities and stakeholder perspectives.
These formulated criteria will serve as a common, action-guiding framework for actors from all science organizations—that is, higher education institutions as well as non-university research institutions—for negotiations with providers of publishing services. . . .The criteria are organized into the following aspects: journal transformation, pricing; transparency, workflow, preprints, metadata and interfaces, statistics, tracking, and waivers.
CCB proceedings may also pose a threat to freedom of expression for scholars and others who build on original works. There is, of course, the danger that the resolution of CCB infringement claims could result in required payment or an agreement to cease certain activity. Yet if a claimant files a takedown notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in addition to a CCB claim, the allegedly infringing work could remain off-line as long as it sits on the CCB docket awaiting resolution. This potential timescale is in contrast to the current DMCA notice-and-takedown regime, which requires an internet platform to repost an allegedly infringing work online within fourteen days in response to a counternotice that the work is not infringing. The new, extended takedown period thus constitutes a form of censorship.
In support of the Graduate Center community’s needs, the Electronic Resources Librarian, at the rank of Instructor or Assistant Professor, coordinates and administers the library’s electronic resources. The incumbent pursues an active scholarly agenda and participates in college- and university-wide programs and committees as assigned.
We’re looking for an enthusiastic AWS Cloud Infrastructure Engineer to implement, optimise, and maintain our cloud-based systems. The responsibilities of this role include designing, commissioning and managing cloud environments, deploying and debugging systems, and contributing to new cloud initiatives.