MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586402944 · doi:10.1017/s0305862x0002152x

Accessing Material from the Genocide Archive of Rwanda

2012· article· en· W1586402944 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Williamson Sinalo

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Research & Documentation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenocideColonialismGeneral partnershipHistoryLibrary scienceMedia studiesLawPolitical scienceArchaeologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1994 around 800,000 Rwandan people were killed in a hundred days of genocide. The Aegis Trust, a genocide education charity, began collecting testimonies from survivors in 2004 and, in partnership with Kigali City Council, established a national memorial site and archive, known as the Genocide Archive of Rwanda. In addition to the testimonies, this Archive now houses a wide range of materials such as footage of Gacaca court proceedings and annual remembrance ceremonies, maps, historical photographs, colonial documents, propaganda literature, identification cards and other official documents. To increase the accessibility of these archival materials, on 10 December 2010, the Genocide Archive of Rwanda launched its own website ( http://www.genocidearchiverwanda.org.rw ). providing members of the international community with an opportunity to explore the digital database. As yet, the digital archive contains only a small number of the testimonies that have been recorded.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1320.060

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Research & DocumentationSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207