MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169996920 · doi:10.1145/1065385.1065460

The challenges in developing digital collections of phonograph records

2005· article· en· W2169996920 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Lai, Ichiro Fujinaga, Cynthia Leive

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonographDigitizationMetadataWorkflowComputer scienceArchivistProcess (computing)World Wide WebMultimediaDatabaseEngineeringTelecommunicationsLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To facilitate long-term preservation and sustain the utility of phonograph records, an efficient and economical workflow management system for digitization is necessary. We describe in this paper the digitization process for building an online digital collection of phonograph records and our procedure for creating the ground-truth data, which is essential for developing an efficient metadata and content capturing system. We also discuss the challenges of defining metadata for phonograph records and their packaging to enhance access and use across traditional boundaries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207