Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine le genre d'« archivation 1 » qui est produite par les historiens de la famille.Dans ce processus, la fonction et le sens des archives en Écosse évoluent, et ce texte offre un examen de cette transformation.D'abord, il donne un aperçu de la façon dont l'histoire de la famille s'est developpée avec le temps, en traçant sa relation avec l'histoire des archives écossaises.Ensuite, l'article examine plusieurs thèmes reliés à l'histoire de la famille et au tourisme.Ceux-ci incluent un examen de la diaspora écossaise et de l'idée du retour chez-soi; une comparaison de la façon dont le concept de l'authenticité est appliqué dans l'industrie du tourisme et aux archives; et enfin, une discussion du rôle des archives dans la construction de l'identité.ABSTRACT This article explores the kind of "archivization" 2 that is produced by family historians.Within this process, the function and meaning of archives in Scotland is changing and here is offered an examination of this transformation.Firstly, an overview of how family history has developed over time and its relation to the history of Scottish archives is provided.Secondly, the article investigates several themes within family history and tourism.These include an exploration of the Scottish diaspora and the idea of homecoming; a comparison of how the concept of authentici ty is used within the tourist industry and archives; and finally a discussion on the role that archives play in the construction of identity.* I would like to thank the students and staff of HATII at the University of Glasgow, and Michael Moss, Susan Tucker, and Ronald Lambert for their help, comments and encourage ment in the preparation of my MSc dissertation upon which this article
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".