MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586501626

Defining Electronic Series: A Study

2002· article· en· W1586501626 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivaria · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)Presentation (obstetrics)Process (computing)Computer scienceProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article explore la faon dont les sries de documents lectroniques oprationnels, c'est--dire les sries de documents telles qu'elles furent cres, conserves et utilises par les crateurs au cours de leurs activits, sont transformes par le processus d'acquisition en sries archivistiques.L'auteur soutient que les postulats qui sous-tendent le processus d'acquisition et qui furent dveloppes dans le contexte d'un environnement papier auraient besoin d'tre rexamines afin d'tre utilises dans un environnement lectronique en s'appuyant sur des exemples tirs de ses rcentes expriences aux Archives de l'Ontario.L'article se termine sur des observations quant l'impact de l'acquisition de sries de documents lectroniques pour les institutions d'archives.ABSTRACT This article explores the way operational electronic series, i.e., series of records as they were created, maintained, and used by creators during their normal course of business, are transformed into archival series by the acquisition process.It contends that the assumptions behind acquisition processes developed in the paper environment may need re-examination for use in the electronic environment, using illustrations drawn from recent experiences at the Archives of Ontario.The article closes with some observations on the impact of acquiring electronic series on archival institutions.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.171 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivariaSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207