The Generic Evolution of Calendars and Guides at the Public Record Office of Great Britain, ca. 1838–1968
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
In this article we report on a historical study of the calendars and guides published by the Public Record Office (PRO) of Great Britain between 1838 and 1968. Drawing on rhetorical genre theory, we conceive of these finding aids as sociohistorical texts and trace their evolution across three dimensions (textual features, composing processes, and social roles). Our study suggests that the calendars and guides were not simply tools for making the PRO's holdings accessible to the public; they also shaped and were shaped by ideas and beliefs about what it meant to make records accessible to the public and the most effective means of accomplishing that end. These ideas and beliefs were linked, in turn, to the PRO's sense of its purpose and identity in relation to the communities it served. The generic evolution of the calendars and guides reflects and, to some extent, embodies that evolving sense of purpose and identity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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