To Understand Ourselves: Introduction to the 40th Anniversary Issue of Archivaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue celebrates Archivaria's 40th anniversary.in the winter of 1975-76, the journal's first issue was published, following the formal establishment of the Association of canadian Archivists earlier in 1975.That was also the year that the commission on canadian Studies published To Know Ourselves.called the Symons report after the commission chair, Thomas h.B.Symons, the report described self-knowledge as central to the development of canadian identity and society, and emphasized the corresponding importance of canadian studies as part of canadians' education.in the fall of 2014, reflecting on the close timing of the origins of Archivaria and the publication of the Symons report, the Archivaria Editorial Board drafted a call for papers that would look at -to borrow words from Symons' introduction -"who we are; where we are in time and space; where we have been; where we are going; what we possess; what our responsibilities are to ourselves and to others." 1 The 40th anniversary issue was conceived as a forum to consider the history, development, and purpose of Archivaria, and its contributions to archival thinking since its inception, as well as to reflect more broadly on the role, scope, and nature of archives, and to speculate on the future of the profession and the discipline.The call for papers invited contributions from archivists and archival scholars, as well as from allied professionals, users of archives, and others with a stake in the archival endeavour.2 The first article included in this special issue takes up the call directly.Laura Millar's article, echoing the Symons report's focus on self-knowledge, examines 40 years' worth of Archivaria articles in order to try to explain how 1 T.h.B. Symons, To Know Ourselves: The Report of the Commission on Canadian Studies, 2 vols.(Ottawa: Association of Universities and colleges of canada, 1975), 12.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.027 |
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".