ARQUIVÍSTICA, HISTÓRIA E CIÊNCIA DA INFORMAÇÃO: diálogos e duelos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
portuguesEste artigo tem por objetivo discutir as relacoes que se construiram entre a arquivistica, a historia e a ciencia da informacao, no decorrer do desenvolvimento da primeira. Apresenta-se o percurso inicial da arquivistica no seculo XIX, enquanto tecnica relacionada a historia e a atividade de pesquisa historia afim de servir como uma das bases para a construcao das identidades nacionais. A partir dos anos de 1950 a area passa por mudancas profundas devido a nova realidade de producao documental, da atividade administrativa e do inicio de mudancas no campo historiografico. A partir da decada de 1950-1960 com os trabalhos desenvolvidos nos arquivos nacionais americanos apoiados nos preceitos estabelecidos por Schellenberg, W. Kaye Lamb dentre outros, e nas decadas de 1970-1980 as politicas e metodos desenvolvidos por alguns autores da tradicao Australiana, irao sistematicamente refutar e desvincular a arquivistica da historia, aproximando-a da administracao e gestao, das areas relacionadas as tecnologias computacionais, com os cartoes perfurados e fitas magneticas e mais tarde aos documentos digitais, iniciando o percurso irreversivel da producao de documentos em meios alem do papel. A partir dos anos de 1980 a area multiplica-se em abordagens e buscou-se, discutir preceitos para o desenvolvimento da arquivistica pos-moderna e suas relacoes com a historia. Em um Segundo momento, trabalha-se coma as possibilidades de relacao entre a arquivistica e a ciencia da informacao, relacionando a arquivistica com a perspectiva neodocumental. EnglishThis article aims to discuss the relationships built between archival science, history and information science, during the development of the first. Shows the initial development of the archival science i n the nineteenth century as a technique related to history in order to serve as basis for the construction of national identities. From the 1950s and 1960s the field undergoes profound changes due to the new reality of documentary production, administrative activity and changes historiography field. From the 1950-1960s with the work done at the US National Archives supported with the concepts established by Schellenberg,W. Kaye Lamb and others, and the decades of 1970-1980 policies and methods developed by some authors of the Australian and Canadian tradition, will systematically refute and unlink the archival science from history, approaching administration and management field, with punched cards and magnetic tapes and later to digital documents, initiating the irreversible path of production of documents in ways beyond the paper. From the 1980s the area multiplies in approaches and sought to discuss its principles for the development of postmodern archival science and its relationship with history. In a second moment, work with the possible relationship between the archival and information science, correlating the archival science with the neodocumental perspective.
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.031 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".