Tracking changes in natural history collections utilization: A case study at the Museum of Southwestern Biology at the University of New Mexico
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
Abstract Natural history collections (NHCs) are used in many fields of study, but general knowledge regarding their uses is poor. Because of this, funding and support for NHCs frequently fluctuate. One way in which collections professionals can illustrate a collection’s contribution to a variety of fields is based on the collection’s history of use. Tracking NHC utilization through time can increase NHC value to others outside of the collection, allow for the analysis of changes in specimen-based research trends, and assist in effective collection management. This case study focuses on NHC usage records held by the Museum of Southwestern Biology (MSB), a currently growing university collection used in many research fields, and presents methods for quantifying collections utilization through time. Through an exploration of these data, this paper illustrates MSB’s growth and changes in research produced over time and offers explanations for the changes observed. Last, this study provides suggestions for how collections professionals can most greatly benefit from considering NHC records as a data source. Understanding NHC usage from “the collection’s perspective” provides a new way for NHC professionals to understand NHCs’ value in the context of the research it supports and demonstrates the importance of this key infrastructure to a broader audience.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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