MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1521359944

From Digital Diplomatics to Digital Records Forensics

2010· article· en· W1521359944 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivaria · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCustodiansArchivistDigital forensicsPolitical scienceLibrary scienceHumanitiesHistoryComputer securityComputer scienceArtArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il y a quinze ans, Elizabeth Diamond dcrivait l'archiviste comme un scientifique mdicolgal.Depuis quelques annes, plusieurs auteurs dans le domaine de l'archivistique ont qualifi les professionnels responsables de la prservation des documents numriques de conservateurs de confiance ( trusted keepers ), ou de gardiens ( custodians ).Sans doute, dans l'environnement numrique, on fait de plus en plus appel aux professionnels de l'information pour valuer et prserver l'authenticit des documents dont ils sont responsables, et pour agir en tant que tierce parties neutres.Mais sont-ils qualifis pour remplir ce rle?Cet article tente d'identifier les connaissances que doit avoir le professionnel d'information de confiance pour tre capable d'valuer la vracit ( trustworthiness ) des documents numriques et pour assurer que leur authenticit puisse tre dmontre, au besoin, n'importe quel point dans leur cycle de vie.Pour ce faire, l'article prsente des concepts dvelopps par le projet InterPARES dans le domaine de la diplomatique des documents numriques; il compare ceux-ci aux concepts pertinents drivs d'une discipline relativement nouvelle, le numrique mdicolgal ( digital forensics ); il discute des mthodologies dont se servent les deux disciplines; et il propose des domaines qui pourraient tre explors conjointement par les experts en diplomatique et en numrique mdicolgal afin de dvelopper un corpus de savoir intgr que l'on pourrait nommer la science mdicolgale des documents numriques ( Digital Records Forensics ).ABSTRACT Fifteen years ago, Elizabeth Diamond described the archivist as a forensic scientist.In the past few years, several archival writers have referred to professionals responsible for keeping digital records as trusted keepers or custodians.Undoubtedly, in the digital environment, record professionals are increasingly called to assess and preserve the authenticity of the records they are responsible for, and to act as neutral third parties.But, are they qualified to fulfill this role?This article aims to begin identifying the body of knowledge that a trusted record professional needs in order to assess the trustworthiness of digital records and ensure that their continuing * I dedicate this article to the memory of Elizabeth Diamond who encouraged and inspired me when I was learning to be a Canadian archivist.The fact that it took me fifteen years to truly understand her call and bring it to fruition shows her foresight and imagination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it