Panoramas del pasado: archiveros, historiadores y combates por la memoria
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
Los historiadores y archiveros se acercan al pasado documental de formas diferente. Los historiadores se centran en el “archivo y las cuestiones del poder, memoria e identidad alrededor de la inscripcion inicial de un documento (o la serie de documentos).Los archiveros se concentran en los y en la historia de los documentos a traves del tiempo, incluyendo las numerosas intervenciones de los archiveros (y de otros) que transforman (y cambian) el archivo original en los archivos. Este articulo explora la historia de las dos profesiones y las falsas ideas que ocultan los mas profundos matices de los multiples contextos que rodean los documentos y que pueden mejorar su comprension y uso. Se concluye que los archivos no son depositos de documentos sin problemas que estan a la espera de que el historiador, sino sitios activos de la entidad y del poder, y ambas profesiones deben aceptar la subjetividad de los archivos.HISTORIA DE LOS ARCHIVOS / TEORIA ARCHIVISTICA / RELACION HISTORIADOR-ARCHIVERO / VALORACION DE ARCHIVOS / ARCHIVOS POSMODERNOS Historians and archivists approach the documentary past differently. Historians focus on the and issues of power, memory, and identity centred around the initial inscription of a document (or series of documents). Archivists concentrate on and the history of documents over time, including the many interventions by archivists (and others) that transform (and change) that original archive into archives. This essay explores the history of the two professions and the resulting misconceptions that blind both to deeper nuances of the multiple contexts surrounding records that may enhance their understanding and use. It concludes that archives are not un-problematic storehouses of records awaiting the historian, but active sites of agency and power, and both professions should accept the subjectivity of archives.HISTORY OF ARCHIVES / ARCHIVAL THEORY / HISTORIAN-ARCHIVIST RELATIONSHIP / ARCHIVAL APPRAISAL / POSTMODERN ARCHIVESHistory of archives / archival theory / historian-archivist relationship / archival appraisal / postmodern archives
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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