Birds of a Feather: Some Fundamentals on the Archives–Ecology Paradigm
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
Cet article passe en revue les concepts de prservation, de conservation et d'cologie, en vue d'tablir le lien entre la thorie et la pratique archivistiques, ainsi que la philosophie et la protection environnementales, comme des domaines qui sont intellectuellement lis et non seulement analogues.En dpassant la mtaphore de l'or ganique qui est omniprsente dans la littrature professionnelle, l'auteur invite les archivistes examiner les ides et les applications parallles tant au niveau des archives que de l'cologie qui peuvent agir sur le processus de prise de dcision.Il encourage de plus les archivistes s'loigner du positivisme qui a souvent guid leurs activits, pour se diriger plutt vers un paradigme plus pluraliste tel qu'il se prsente dans les sciences biologiques et physiques.Le rsultat est une connaissance fonda mentale de l'intersection thorique entre archives et cologie, en lien avec des modles qui peuvent mener vers des applications pratiques dans l'valuation et l'accs des archives.ABSTRACT This article reviews the concepts of preservation, conservation, and ecol ogy in order to establish archival theory and practice, and environmental philosophy and protection as intellectually related domains, not merely analogous subjects.Moving beyond the organic metaphor peppered throughout the professional literature, it challenges archivists to look more widely at the parallel ideas and applications in archives and ecology that can influence and inform their decision-making process, and encourages archivists to move further away from the positivism that has directed much of their activities toward a more pluralistic paradigm evident in the biological and physical sciences.The outcome is a fundamental understanding of the theoretical intersection of archives and ecology coupled with models that can guide practical applications in appraisal and access for archives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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