MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617236869 · doi:10.20396/sinteses.v4i4.7253

Digitalização de documentos no Arquivo Central/SIARQ da UNICAMP: preservação e acesso

2016· article· pt· W2617236869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rodrigo Lizardi Souza

Bibliographic record

VenueSínteses: Revista Eletrônica do SIMTEC · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O Arquivo Central do Sistema de Arquivos da Unicamp tem trabalhado no âmbito da gestao e da preservacao digital em algumas frentes, entre elas a proposicao de politicas, de normas para procedimentos e a implantacao de infraestrutura para armazenamento visando a preservacao de documentos arquivisticos da Unicamp. Para a determinacao de politicas e normas destacam-se algumas acoes como a participacao no Projeto InterPARES 3 (International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems), em convenio com o Arquivo Nacional e a Universidade British Columbia do Canada, a participacao da Câmara Tecnica de Documentos Eletronicos do Conselho Nacional de Arquivos e a atuacao da Comissao de Documentos Digitais da Unicamp, que resultaram na publicacao da Resolucao GR no 17/2011. Com relacao a infraestrutura implantou o Repositorio Digital do Arquivo Central visando armazenamento confiavel de documentos e desta experiencia, surgiu o projeto de digitalizacao de documentos do Arquivo Permanente do AC/Unicamp. O objetivo e utilizar a digitalizacao como alternativa para preservacao de originais e para ampliar o acesso aos documentos do acervo. O projeto em desenvolvimento privilegiou os conjuntos documentais produzidos por atividades de pesquisa da Unicamp, referentes ao periodo de sua instalacao. O projeto levou em consideracao recomendacoes do CONARQ e de outras instituicoes, no que se refere a padroes de metadados e formatos de arquivos e a estrutura de armazenamento. Foi instalado um laboratorio de digitalizacao com apoio da FAPESP, em seu Programa Infraestrutura 2009, e cerca de 800 dossies de docentes serao privilegiados neste projeto

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSínteses: Revista Eletrônica do SIMTECSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207