Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte examine le lien entre la mémoire et les archives en explorant les concepts de la mémoire individuelle et collective et en analysant les processus associés à la création, la saisie, la sauvegarde et le repérage des souvenirs.L'auteure sonde la métaphore des archives comme mémoire, puis elle lie notre perception de la mémoire à une connaissance de la création, de la préservation et de l'usage des documents et des archives.Elle montre que la mémoire individuelle et collective ne représente qu'un fragment des événements d'une vie donnée et elle considère les réalités émotives, temporelles et politiques qui influent sur ce dont on se souvient et comment l'on y parvient.Elle conclue que les documents et les archives ne sont pas d'eux-mêmes des « souvenirs », mais qu'ils sont plutôt des balises sur lesquels l'on peut retrouver, préserver et articuler des souvenirs.ABSTRACT This paper considers the relationship between memory and archives by exploring the concepts of individual and collective memory and by examining the processes involved with creating, capturing, storing, and retrieving memories.The author considers the metaphor of archives as memory and relates our perception of memory to our understanding of the creation, preservation, and use of records and archives.She demonstrates that individual and collective memory represent only a fragment of life events and she reflects on the emotional, temporal, and political realities that affect what we remember and how.She concludes that records and archives are not in themselves "memories" but only touchstones upon which memories may be retrieved, preserved, and articulated.Archivists often draw on the metaphor of memory to explain their mission.As Barbara Craig has suggested, the allusion provides "a convenient shorthand" to explain the nature of archival work and the place of archives in society. 1 * This paper was originally presented at the International Congress on Archives, Vienna, Austria, 24 August 2004.I would like to acknowledge the valuable contributions made by Eric Ketelaar and Heather MacNeil during the development of this essay, as well as the very helpful inputs received from Robert McIntosh at Archivaria, along with the anonymous reviewers who so graciously shared their ideas and suggestions.1 Barbara Craig, "Selected Themes in the Literature on Memory and Their Pertinence to Archives," American Archivist, vol.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".