FRIENDS OF THE YUKON ARCHIVES SOCIETY, For the Record: Yukon Archives, 1972–2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
0-7.This booklet is not designed to guide the reader on how to build an archives from scratch; rather it is an album of memories, illustrations, and recollections representing forty years of Yukon Archives perseverance.The Friends of the Yukon Archives Society and the staff of the Yukon Archives (YA) collaborated on this fortieth anniversary project designed to tell the YA story in broad strokes, including a brief history of its development, significant achievements, and noteworthy acquisitions.The Yukon Archives is a magnificent structure in a visually stunning setting.its existence is a remarkable achievement given that this impressive facility is located in canada's second smallest province/territory (population 34,000), equal in size to southern cities such as Midland, Ontario; New Glasgow, Nova Scotia; and Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan.The booklet combines text and more than one hundred illustrations depicting the evolution of the Yukon Archives.These developments are placed within the larger context of territorial progress, along with the introduction of the major players who helped shape the archives' history.The layout attractively mixes narrative, photographs, reproductions of archival documents, architectural drawings, news clippings, maps, election campaign buttons, and even an array of document fasteners used over the years.There are six chapters describing the time prior to the birth of the Yukon Archives, as well as a chapter for each decade that followed its creation.Commentary from each of the five individuals who have served as Territorial Archivist -Brian Speirs, Miriam McTiernan, Linda Johnson, Diane chisholm, and ian Burnett -provides a unifying feature from chapter to chapter.Other topics common to each chapter include physical developments, organizational changes, acquisitions, and program evolution, along with technological and administrative structures introduced in each era.While each of the five archivists brought different strengths and skill sets to the post, they all shared the same dedication to duty and passion for the preservation of Yukon history.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.006 |
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".