Bibliographic record
Abstract
The collecting of natural history art related to the exploration of a country and other material from this era appears to be a strong and shared theme in many government institutions in settler societies particularly those of the former British colonies of Australia, New Zealand and Canada. This paper examines this type of collection; the Australiana, Tasmaniana, Canadiana collections that are such a feature of museums, art galleries and libraries of post-settler societies. I will discuss how natural history art is used as the interest in creating a history; as a society moves from identifying with the colonial power, to establishing its own identity and sense of self; as that awareness grows, so too does interest in the past, in creating a history that is ones own.Tasmania (formerly Van Diemens Land) has rich and extensive collections of Tasmaniana in its state institutions; Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, State Library of Tasmania, Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery. With increasing interest in the environment, there is a growing interest in the fauna and flora illustrations associated with exploration and settlement, and museums, art galleries and libraries in post-settler societies view these works as significant, going to extraordinary lengths to secure the works.I will examine and discuss the history of two collections of natural history art in detail; the orchid illustrations of Tasmanian-born botanist and illustrator, William Archer (18201874), whose illustrations can be found at the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (as well as JD Hookers Flora Tasmaniae and the Linnean Society of London), and the natural history illustrations of the convict artist William Buelow Gould (18011853), held by the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery of Launceston (Goulds works are also held in most major galleries and libraries of Australia).
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".