A representação arquivística na tradição canadense: subsídios para elaboração de um modelo ideal de ensino por meio da semântica textual
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
It presents a study relating Linguistics and Archival Science through semantics and Archival Representation. The general objective was to contribute to the construction of a theoretical and methodological reference regarding the Archival Representation in the Canadian context, aiming the creation of a teaching model based on textual semantics, and its specific objectives were to analyze research instruments of two Canadian institutions; to observe the linguistic analysis criteria established for this research, in these instruments; compare the approaches in representation in the two selected institutions. The method used to achieve these objectives is characterized by being an exploratory, theoretical and documentary study, having the semantic and textual construction criteria of meaning and constituent elements of textual coherence and cohesion as a methodology of analysis for understanding the paths of Archival Representation in the research tools of the Canadian Archives - Library and Archives Canada (LAC) and Provincial Archives of Manitoba. We delimitated these two Canadian institutions from federal and state action spheres, respectively, to analyze the classification and description of archives practices due to the importance to the scenario of the chosen country, since these institutions present different approaches in representation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it