MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212291107 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645925.v1

Providing Enhanced Digital Access to a Collection of Material Photographs: a Considered Approach

2021· preprint· en· W3212291107 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Buckley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhotography and Visual Culture
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld Wide WebComputer scienceMateriality (auditing)XMLData collectionInstitutionPublic accessDigital mediaMultimediaArtSociologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The material-turn in photographic studies reveals that photographs cannot be correctly understood without direct interpretation of their physicality; however, institutions with photograph collections are increasingly offering digital access to these physical objects. With the benefits of digital access being too great to ignore, this research determines how a public institution can best enhance access to a collection of material photographs through digital media, while maintaining the core needs of the institution, its users, and the meaning of the photographs themselves. Using the Charles Chusseau-Flaviens collection at George Eastman House as an example, this research reveals practical benefits of combining Web 2.0 technologies such as Flickr with Encoded Archival Description (EAD) into an effective and efficient collection-level finding aid. This thesis presents an approach to providing enhanced digital access to a large collection of photographs while considering their materiality. The resulting finding aid can be found at: http://www.ryanbuckley.ca/findingaid/chusseau-flaviens.xml.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.218 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotography and Visual CultureFrench-language works237,207