MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1846740668

All Singing, All Talking, All Digital: Media Windows and Archiving Practice in the Motion Picture Studios

2008· article· en· W1846740668 on OpenAlex
Randal Luckow, James M. Turner

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivaria · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt History and Market Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStudioMovie theaterFilm industryVisual artsRevenueArtMultimediaHumanitiesBusinessComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'tude de cas d'InterPARES 2 sur les images en mouvement a port sur les pratiques d'archivage numrique d'un studio commercial de cinma relativement au matriel gnr par un film produit par infographie.Les rsultats ont montr que le dsintrt traditionnel des studios de production pour les documents qui pourraient avoir une valeur archivistique potentielle s'est transpos dans le monde du numrique.Afin d'expliquer les raisons pour lesquelles l'industrie du cinma n'arrive pas croire que les bonnes pratiques archivistiques sont justifies sur le plan conomique, les auteurs examinent le dveloppement de l'industrie cinmatographique en lien avec la proprit culturelle et af firment que la vision court terme des studios les prive de futures occasions de profit.Les auteurs explorent les modes pour ce qui est de l'emballage et de la consommation des mdias et ils avancent que les sources de revenus prsentement disponibles et non exploites par les studios, de pair avec les possibilits futures encore inconnues, of frent un incitatif conomique suf fisant pour que les studios veillent l'archivage systmatique de leurs documents dans un centre d'archives.Les auteurs concluent que les studios ont tout gagner en adoptant de meilleures pratiques archivistiques l'tape de la production cinmatographique, que ceux qui travaillent en collaboration avec des archivistes professionnels seront des acteurs gagnants dans le monde rapide et imprvisible de l'volution des mdias et que, dans tout ce processus, les documents du patrimoine culturel auront une considration qu'ils n'ont jamais connue auparavant.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.207 · 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