The Archivist as Planner and Poet: Thoughts on the Larger Issues of Appraisal for Acquisition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article traite de questions reliées aux stratégies d'acquisition dans le domaine des documents privés.Il analyse les relations entre le processus d'acquisition et les mandats des institutions d'archives de même que les notions d'importance.L'évaluation y est liée aux concepts plus larges du temps, de la mémoire et de la conservation à long terme des documents.Quatre grands secteurs de la recherche archivistique sont mis en évidence : le rôle de l'évaluation dans la conservation, la nature des documents personnels, les liens entre les archives et les autres objets de la mémoire sociale et, enfin, l'étude des utilisateurs des archives.L'auteure fait valoir que la recherche en histoire des archives doit se poursuivre car elle offre la possibilité de contribuer à l'évaluation archivistique et de l'humaniser.ABSTRACT This article comments on issues related to private sector acquisition strategies.It discusses the relationship of acquisition to institutional mandates and ideas of significance.Appraisal is linked to larger concepts of time, memory, and the continuing preservation of records.Four large areas for archives research are highlighted: the role of appraisal in preservation; the nature of records for private persons; connections between archives and other social memorials; and the study of archives users.The pursuit of archives history is advocated for its potential utilitarian and humane contributions to appraisal.Appraisal transforms the objects of its activities: some ordinary stuff of everyday transactions and communication are selected for special protection in an archives.Those not taken have an uncertain future: those selected will have a prolonged life.They will carry forward accruing burdens of meaning arising from their status as objects of continuing importance, to those who make the selection and to communities of users, some already established, others not yet known.Archivists who do appraisal recognize that it is an extraordinary function with wide ranging implications for society, but more particularly to their insti-* This paper was prepared from a commentary delivered in the session "Private Sector Acquisition Strategies" at the annual general meeting of the Association of Canadian Archivists in Winnipeg (2001).I am grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.084 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".