Traces of humanity: Echoes of social and cultural experience in physical objects and digital surrogates in the University of Victoria Libraries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationships between primary source materials and their digital surrogates warrant consideration about how different materials translate into digitized forms. Physical primary source materials found in library special collections and archives and their digital surrogates challenge the viewer to consider what these objects are communicating through their materiality or lack thereof. For example, how does a clay tablet represent itself digitally, as compared to a parchment manuscript, or a paper accounts book? What qualities, stories or narratives do these resources communicate in their original forms, as digital surrogates, or when engaged with together, and how do these differ? How do both physical and digital resources serve as archival objects with the ability to reflect our social and cultural experiences—and indeed our humanity—back to us? As more and more library and museum resources are digitized and made open to researchers, such questions must be addressed as the use and reuse of digital surrogates becomes increasingly complex as digital scholarship evolves.
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 | 0.007 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.025 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".