Enhancing Access to Primary Sources through Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration and the Digital Humanities: The Stephen L. and Enid Stover Papers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dr. Stephen L. Stover retired from Kansas State University’s Department of Geography in 1989. The Stephen L. and Enid Stover Papers, officially donated in 2014 to the Morse Department of Special Collections at Kansas State University Libraries, document the history of the Stover family. Included in these Papers is a series of 35-millimeter slides that document Stephen L. Stover’s travels domestically and internationally. Consisting of approximately 16,600 well-preserved slides, the series spans over 50 years (1956-2009). The series features a wide range of images, with particularly strong foci on the physical and cultural landscapes of New Zealand and Oceania during the late 1960s; Manhattan and the Flint Hills region of Kansas; the American West and Midwest (particularly Kansas and Wisconsin); Europe; agricultural landscapes; Canadian provinces Ontario and Manitoba during the 1960s; and the Stover family at school, at home, and at play.\nA cross-disciplinary and collaborative approach to the Stephen L. and Enid Stover Papers aims to make the collection available to researchers and the public using elements from the digital humanities. For the Stover slide series, the goal of Special Collections is to have a digital version for improved access and not for preservation initially. Inventorying, organizing, describing, and digitizing the slide series is a collaborative process between subject specialists in geography, family members, and the university archivist. The slide series showcases the way cross-disciplinary perspectives and contributions during the process of describing materials enhance public access to said materials. Additionally, the creation of digital versions of the slides provides a rich resource for further work by digital humanities scholars to apply these sources in new ways, making them more valuable as a data source for future research.\nThis paper is divided into three primary sections. The first section illustrates how the Stephen L. and Enid Stover Papers and the collaborative work being done on the slide series fit within the greater field of digital humanities. In doing so, we discuss our working definitions of digital humanities and cross-disciplinary collaboration. The second section discusses the specifics of the archival process. It examines the way that collaboration between the Stover family, the university archives in the Morse Department of Special Collections, and representatives of K-State academic departments improves understanding of the context of the slides, and how increased awareness of their context can facilitate their application in research. The third section illustrates potential cross-disciplinary uses of the Papers, with in-depth explorations on the ways that researchers within geography and anthropology might make use of the slide series. The third section closes with a final discussion of “downstream” uses. Future researchers’ differences in geography, distance in time, access to advances in technology, and experience of the ebbs and flows of generational knowledge means that their access to the Papers through the means digital humanities ensures that its research value will have a life far beyond the scope of current potential applications.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".