Collections Risk Assessment at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science
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
The Denver Museum of Nature & Science's (DMNS) risk assessment evaluated hazards to collections in storage using the Cultural Property Risk Analysis Model (CPRAM; Waller 2003a) to structure a comprehensive assessment and calculate magnitude of risk. Magnitude of risk (MR) is the fraction of collection value expected to be lost given one hundred years exposure to current conditions. The MR is the simple product of four variables (Fraction Susceptible [FS], Loss in Value [LV], Probability [P], and Extent [E]) that are multiplied as follows: MR = FS x LV x P x E. This paper describes the process as implemented at the DMNS and the resultant collections preservation strategies (Southward and Thorwald 2010). The implementation of these strategies are significantly improving DMNS collections stewardship and is an essential step in a larger preservation process (new storage facility) that results in safe and more accessible storage of the 1.4 million objects the Museum holds in public trust.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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