July 2025 – DigitalKoans

DigitalKoans Posts Resume on 7/8/2025

DigitalKoans posts will resume on 7/8/2025.

Paywall: “Mind the Gap!: How Do We Ethically Bridge the Divide Between the Cataloging/Metadata Community and the World of AI?”

How can cataloging/metadata professionals at academic institutions incorporate general frameworks and standards about ethical AI implementation into policies for AI use. . . . How can technical services/cataloging departments. . . provide accurate and culturally sensitive metadata? More importantly, how do cataloging/metadata professionals ethically fill the gap. . . without sacrificing job security?

https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2025.2525720

Paywall: “Functions of Paradata in Data Papers”

The purpose of this article is to increase our understanding of data papers as research narratives, with a focus on the functions that paradata – information about data creation and management processes and their underlying reasons – have, apart from describing data processes.

https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-11-2024-0293

Open Research Services Librarian at University of the West of England Bristol

Providing guidance to research staff and Post-Graduate Research students on research data preservation and sharing, and the deposit of research data sets to the UWE Bristol Research Data Repository

Day-to-day administration of the UWe Bristol Research Data Repository.

Developing and delivering training sessions to researchers and PGR students.

Reporting on compliance with various open access policies including UK Research and Innovation, and the Research Excellence Framework.

https://tinyurl.com/35x4kpec

Paywall: “How Does the Academia Refer to Open Research Information Data Sources? A Review Study Based on OpenAlex and Microsoft Academic Series”

In this study, we thoroughly review the existing relevant literature and distinguish their different ways of referring to ORIDS. We perform thematic and geographical analyses to outline the current research landscape of ORIDS in academia. Furthermore, we discuss the role of various stakeholders in advancing the development and utilization of ORIDS, and provide recommendations informed by an analysis of the challenges that these stakeholders encounter.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05347-6

E-Resources Librarian at Yale University

Working collaboratively with other librarians and staff, this person supports the ongoing life cycle of e-resource maintenance, with a focus on publisher and package changes and ensuring uninterrupted access to licensed resources. This person collaborates across units in ERSM to provide coordinated, expert management of e-resources, paying particular attention to high-value and high-use packages. Works with key stakeholders to actively manage the full life cycle of subscription resources, including product evaluation, title list management, title changes, publisher and package changes, renewals, and post-cancellation access. Supports the creation and management of accurate data about complex subscription holdings across a variety of systems, including the LMS and discovery system, in support of uninterrupted access.

https://tinyurl.com/23svk9wz

“Scholarly Publishing’s Hidden Diversity: How Exclusive Databases Sustain the Oligopoly of Academic Publishers”

Global scholarly publishing has been dominated by a small number of publishers for several decades. This paper revisits the data on corporate control of scholarly publishing by analyzing the relative shares of scholarly journals and articles published by the major publishers and the “long tail” of smaller, independent publishers, using Dimensions and Web of Science (WoS). The reduction of expenses for printing and distribution and the availability of open-source journal management tools may have contributed to the emergence of small publishers, while recently developed inclusive databases may allow for the study of these. Dimensions’ inclusive indexing revealed the number of scholarly journals and articles published by smaller publishers has been growing rapidly, especially since the onset of large-scale online publishing around 2000, resulting in a higher share of articles from smaller publishers. In parallel, WoS shows increasing concentration within a few corporate publishers. For the 1980–2021 period, we retrieved 32% more articles from Dimensions compared to the more selective WoS. Dimensions’ data showed the expansion of small publishers was most pronounced in the Social Sciences and the Arts and Humanities, but a similar trend is observed in the Natural Sciences and Engineering, and the Health Sciences. A major geographical divergence is also revealed, with English-speaking countries and/or those located in northwestern Europe relying heavily on major publishers for the dissemination of their research, while the rest of the world being relatively independent of the oligopoly. Finally, independent journals publish more often in open access in general, and in Diamond open access in particular. We conclude that enhanced indexing and visibility of recently created, independent journals may favour their growth and stimulate global scholarly bibliodiversity.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0327015

“Bridging the Gap: Improving Data Sharing Practices in Surgical Research”

Of the 1094 articles, only 141 (12.89%) included DSS, with higher rates in clinical trials (18.05%) compared to cohort studies (5.20%). Studies funded by government or industry and open-access articles (18.95%) were more likely to include DSS. Journals with higher impact factors were more likely to comply. Thematic analysis revealed recurring issues of gatekeeping, conditional data access, and privacy concerns. Out of 96 corresponding authors contacted, only 18 shared data.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2025.04.036

“Ask The Chefs — New Court Decisions Issued in Cases Addressing AI Training and Copyright”

Last week saw the release of two court decisions in cases addressing the use of copyrighted material for training of artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, Bartz et al., v. Anthropic, and Kadrey et al., v. Meta. We asked the Chefs for their thoughts on these decisions and the potential impacts on publishers and authors. . . .

[Roy Kaufman] Of the 40-plus AI training cases in the US, we now have preliminary decisions in three. And have moved backwards in terms of clarity. To vastly oversimplify the results, training AI is non-transformative infringement (Thomson Reuters v Ross), training is transformative and mostly fair use with a major caveat (Bartz), or training is mostly not fair use– but was fair use in this case because the lawyers did not plead correctly (Kadrey).

[Rick Anderson] First, as to the “fair use” nature of using copyrighted texts to train AI large language models: it seems clear to me that such applications represent a transformative use of the copyrighted content.

[Todd Carpenter] My expectation is—and has been for some time—that these cases will drive the AI vendor community (or at least those with the resources) to seek content agreements with the publishing world as quickly and efficiently as possible.

https://tinyurl.com/4w8ttcux

“Categorizing Methods and Approaches for Generating and Identifying Paradata”

Documenting the processes and practices of making and processing research data has been identified as key prerequisite of data reusability and intelligibility. A large number of methods and approaches for generating and identifying such information have been proposed, however, dispersed across the literature. Consequently, the current understanding of what types of approaches have been envisioned, how they differ and relate to each other, and what kind of paradata they produce is limited. This paper reports an initial study to increase understanding of the methods landscape through review and categorization of paradata generation and identification methods. We identified three major temporal categories of (1) prospective, (2) in situ, and (3) retrospective methods and approaches, and five categories of paradata artifacts generated: (1) structured metadata, (2) narratives, (3) snapshots, (4) diagrammatic representations, and (5) standard procedures.

https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006251342811

AAAS Report: “What Scientists Need to Know About Sharing—and Protecting—Their Published Work”

When authors publish papers behind a paywall, reuse is generally limited. In contrast, paid open access typically comes with a Creative Commons (CC) license that delineates how others can use the content of the paper. . . .

But only about half of the 224 scientists who responded to a AAAS survey released today [Survey Reveals Researchers’ Interests,Concerns and Knowledge Gaps]—two-thirds of whom work in the United States—consider themselves familiar with the terms of these licenses.

https://tinyurl.com/4cn2ey6y

Senior Digital Archivist at the Welsh Government

The objective of this post is to lead, co-ordinate and provide strategic support to the local archive sector to develop the capacity to collect, preserve and make accessible digital collections, and to develop digital services.

The post holder will support the local sector to address the development of skills, policies, infrastructure and workflow procedures for the management digital content from acquisition to dissemination.

The post holder will facilitate collaboration between national and local services where there are opportunities for co-operation and efficiency in digital delivery. The post holder will also provide advice and support to local museums and libraries as they develop their capacity to manage both born digital and digitised collections and adapt their service delivery models.

https://tinyurl.com/2jbh2n83

“The Current State of Female Representation in Library Leadership: A Comprehensive Analysis of Over 13,000 Open U.S. Libraries by Library Type, Collection Size, and State”

Women are underrepresented in leadership by 8.2 percentage points (pp) at academic libraries, 5.5 pp at special libraries, 10.7 pp at school libraries, and 14.7 pp at government libraries. This corresponds to a male being 28.6%–185.5% more likely to be director.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2025.2518008