Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian‐US Task Force on Archival Description (CUSTARD) has undertaken the process of reconciling the two principal North American standards for archival description – the Canadian Rules for Archival Description (RAD) and the US’ Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts (APPM) – with each other and with the broader international standard of ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description). The anticipated final product of the CUSTARD project will be a new standard for rules governing description of archival holdings. The first tangible product is a “statement of principles” concerning archival description, which will guide the final development of descriptive rules. A complete draft of the CUSTARD rules should be available for review by June 2003, with publication expected in 2004. The new standard being developed will guide the future of archival description.
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 | 0.014 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.351 | 0.129 |
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".