MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Authenticity of digital records in practice

2015· article· en· W2330002564 on OpenAlexaff
Corinne Rogers

Bibliographic record

Venue2015 Digital Heritage · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)DemocracyAccountabilityE-GovernmentPublic relationsInternet privacyDigital governmentSpace (punctuation)BusinessPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebHistoryInformation and Communications TechnologyPoliticsLawDigital transformation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of citizens to access their government's information fully and in a timely manner is one of the cornerstones of democracy. Citizens' rights and government accountability depend on how information - how records - are created, managed, and preserved. One of the critical aspects of government records is the ability to attest to their authenticity over time and across space. This paper presents selected findings of research into how records professionals approach the issue of authenticity of digital records for which they are responsible. While much research has been and continues to be conducted into the protection of authenticity in the context of requirements for digital preservation, little research has been done until now on the practice and beliefs of practitioners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.071
Scholarly communication0.0270.025
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2015 Digital HeritageSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207