Bibliographic record
Abstract
The collecting of early natural history art of the exploration of a country and other material from this era appears to be a strong in many government institutions in settler societies particularly the former British colonies of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and perhaps the United States of America. This paper examines the compilations; the Australiana, Tasmaniana, Canadiana collections that are such a feature of museums, art galleries and libraries of post-settler societies. I will examine 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 the interest in the past, in creating a history that is ones own. A particular feature of many of these collections is their movement from the private to the public domain; private collectors recognising the emergence of local before their state institutions a trend of individuals defining themselves by their location, while governments are still tied to the colonising powers. As the links with the former colonisers weaken, awareness of the importance to the public of the shared history contained in these collections grows.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, and of course, the Royal Society of Tasmania. I will examine and discuss the history of one of these collections in detail the Allport Library and Museum of Fine Arts, a part of the collections of the State Library of Tasmania.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".