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
The second phase of InterPARES included an extensive investigation of art theory and practice. In the context of previous studies of records and authenticity in archival science, this is perhaps surprising, but it influenced the researchers’ conceptions of the new sorts of record-like electronic displays that are increasingly evident in business, government, and science. It also suggested new dimensions to the concept of authenticity for such displays, by referring to art theorists’ conception of performance. InterPARES 2 case studies and conceptual analyses showed how complicated these digital record-like documents are, embedded as they are in rich cultural and technological contexts, as well as the juridical and administrative ones familiar to archivists. Ironically, this clarifies how difficult it is to preserve both art and art-like digital records. RESUME La deuxieme phase d’InterPARES comprend une enquete etendue sur la theorie et la pratique de l’art. Dans le contexte des etudes precedentes sur les documents d’archives et l’authenticite dans le milieu des sciences de l’archivistique, on peut etre surpris de constater que cette phase a influence la pensee des chercheurs par rapport aux nouvelles sortes d’affichages electroniques a caractere documentaire qui deviennent de plus en plus courants dans le monde des af faires, du gouvernement et des sciences. Elle a aussi permis d’apporter de nouvelles dimensions au concept de l’authenticite pour ce genre d’af fichage, en se referant au concept de la performance, telle que definie par les penseurs de l’art. Les etudes de cas d’InterPARES 2 et les analyses conceptuelles ont revele la complexite de ces documents numeriques a caractere archivistique, influences comme ils le sont par les contextes culturels et technologiques, ainsi que par les contextes juridiques et administratifs que les archivistes connaissent deja. L’ironie du sort veut que cette clarification montre la complexite de la preservation de l’art et des documents numeriques a caractere artistique.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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