Reflections on the Goal of Archival Appraisal in Democratic Societies
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 fournit une rflexion sur les ides qui sous-tendent l'valuation archivistique dans les socits dmocratiques.L'auteur examine quelques courants de pense rcents relatifs l'valuation et aux concepts de base de la gouvernance dmocratique, afin de lancer une discussion sur les buts de l'valuation dans les socits dmocratiques et sur les difficults d'atteindre ces buts.D'un ct, il fait valoir que l'valuation sert comprendre rtrospectivement les actions des gouvernements, ce qui constitue un des moyens de promouvoir la connaissance claire dans la cit dmocratique.De l'autre, il avance que l'valuation doit satisfaire le besoin de reconnaissance et d'identit des communauts culturelles au sein des socits dmocratiques pluralistes.L'auteur conclut que les archivistes doivent continuer de se proccuper de l'intgrit du matriel qu'ils slectionnent, tout en servant cette double finalit de l'valuation dans les socits dmocratiques.ABSTRACT This is a reflective essay on ideas that animate archival appraisal in democratic societies.The author examines some recent strains in thinking about appraisal and some ideas about the basic concepts of democratic governance in preparation for a discussion of the goal of appraisal in democratic societies and the difficulties in the way of achieving that goal.On the one hand, he argues that appraisal serves the goal of retrospective understanding of the actions of government as one of the means of fostering enlightened understanding in a democratic polis.On the other, he advances the view that appraisal must attend to the need that pluralistic democratic societies have to foster the recognition and identity of cultural communities in their midst.He concludes that archivists must continue to concern themselves with the integrity of the material they select while serving this dual goal of appraisal in democratic societies.The aim of this article is to develop some ideas about the goal of archival appraisal in democratic societies and to examine some of the difficulties that lie in the way of achieving the goal.This is a dangerous subject to address for
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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