MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074089505 · doi:10.1093/jahist/jar303

Columbia River Basin Ethnic History Archive

2011· article· en· W2074089505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erin Passehl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupDocumentationState (computer science)Library scienceStructural basinGeographyArchaeologyHistoryNewspaperLatin AmericansOral historyEthnologyAnthropologyMedia studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2003 the Columbia River Basin Ethnic History Archive was developed to highlight hidden ethnic histories of the Columbia River basin. A tri-state collaboration using CONTENTdm collection-management software, contributing institutions included the Vancouver and Pullman campuses of Washington State University, and the Idaho State Historical Society, the Oregon Historical Society, and the Washington State Historical Society. Funded by an Institute for Museum and Library Service grant, the project's goal was to identify, digitize, and describe collections concerning non–Native American ethnic groups of the basin. According to the Web site, the archive focuses on relatively recent migrants identified as having African, Asian, European, or Latin American heritage whose archival documentation is less extensive. The archive is strongest in documents and photographs, but it also includes reports, records, maps, newspapers, artifacts, and oral history interviews from the region dating back to 1860. The site is divided into four parts. Part 1 provides...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.026

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American HistorySame topicOral History, Memory, Narrative AnalysisFrench-language works237,207