Questioning the Past and Possible Futures: Digital Historiography and Critical Librarianship
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
Historical digitization projects are transformative endeavours that attempt to negotiate and navigate a past's relationship to the present and the future. This article considers librarians' roles within the context of critical librarianship and digital historiography and argues for a more robust role for librarians within these transformative endeavours. Within the literature on digital humanities, there are recurrent assumptions that librarians' roles in digitization projects ought to be those of collectors, cataloguers, preservers, metadata creators, web designers, or programmers while the intellectual or theoretical "heavy lifting" falls to disciplinary partners like historians or literary scholars. In this article, we argue that librarians' digital historical work also needs to engage with "core historical questions" and with the act of asking critical questions about the larger cultural, social, and political issues inherent in digitization work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.052 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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