Newspaper archives + text mining = rich sources of historical geo-spatial data
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
Newspaper archives are rich sources of cultural, social, and historical information. These archives, even when digitized, are typically unstructured and organized by date rather than by subject or location, and require substantial manual effort to analyze. The effort of journalists to be accurate and precise means that there is often rich geo-spatial data embedded in the text, alongside text describing events that editors considered to be of sufficient importance to the region or the world to merit column inches. A regional newspaper can add over 100,000 articles to its database each year, and extracting information from this data for even a single country would pose a substantial Big Data challenge. In this paper, we describe a pilot study on the construction of a database of historical flood events (location(s), date, cause, magnitude) to be used in flood assessment projects, for example to calibrate models, estimate frequency, establish high water marks, or plan for future events in contexts ranging from urban planning to climate change adaptation. We then present a vision for extracting and using the rich geospatial data available in unstructured text archives, and suggest future avenues of research.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it