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
Give us the tools and we'll finish the job.—Winston Churchill, radio broadcast, February 9, 1941Dear Readers,First and foremost, we offer heartfelt wishes that you are healthy and safe. As we write these words in Spring 2020, it is impossible to know what the months ahead will bring, but even optimistic models predict continued sacrifice and pain—physical, psychological, and economic. Despite the old saying that “the show must go on,” even Broadway has shuttered its doors. In such turbulent times, it may seem questionable to proceed with a nonessential activity. But as historians we remember Winston Churchill and others who have faced even more frightening threats. While some may recollect famous words about the “courage to continue”—words that Churchill apparently never said—we take our inspiration from a speech that described military events of 1940–41 and American aid. We persist in the firm belief that history is important. As long as we are able to do so safely, we will continue to disseminate stories of how libraries have survived, responded to, and in some cases been permanently changed by national emergencies and other more mundane challenges. While not officially classified as essential in the same way that food or medicine are, we take heart from LCHS readers who have shared how the journal is a welcome and productive diversion from the dispiriting news of the day.Of course, we would only undertake this venture with assurances that the enterprise could be conducted safely. Your co-editors are working remotely and Zoom is becoming an important “tool” in our arsenal. The Penn State Press, including all members of the journals team, has also shifted to a remote working environment. The composition vendors have activated plans for remote work and have implemented necessary accommodations for their staff. Our online host, JSTOR, likewise, has facilitated a remote working environment for their staff. Our printer is deemed an essential business and remains in operation with special procedures in place to protect staff currently working at the plant. Due to these precautions, copies of the journal can continue to be printed and mailed. As has often been stated, this is a dynamic, ever-changing situation, but for now we are able to produce and distribute the journal as scheduled. Should circumstances change, we will respond responsibly and communicate with LCHS subscribers.Further demonstrating that change is always a constant, we announce that Dr. Ed Goedeken, an LCHS board member since the journal's founding, is retiring at the end of this academic year. As many readers are surely aware, Ed compiled the Bibliography of Library History (http://www.ala.org/rt/lhrt/popularresources/libhistorybib/libraryhistory) for nearly thirty years, an experience he wrote about in the most recent issue of LCHS. He also wrote numerous literature reviews pertaining to library history. His knowledge of publishing in our field is unsurpassed, and he's been an invaluable contributor to our journal's development. We wish Ed the best of health and happiness in his “next chapter”!We are thrilled that Dr. Andrew B. Wertheimer, associate professor in the Library and Information Science Program at the University of Hawai'i at Manoa, has agreed to join our board. Andrew brings significant research expertise pertaining to Asia (particularly Japan) and has also published several articles about LHRT's history and library history literature. He is a former member of the editorial board of Library Quarterly and a former chair of the Library History Round Table. Andrew will finish the second year of Ed's term, then serve a two-year term of his own (May 1, 2020–April 30, 2023)We now turn to our regularly scheduled programming—the substantive scholarly essays and book reviews we are pleased to publish in this issue. Interestingly, some of them touch upon the inaccessibility or invisibility of records, a problem that many of us are facing during COVID-19. We start with Michael Handis's “Pantainos and His Unique, Ancient Library,” our first published manuscript to focus on the world of the Ancient Mediterranean. We expect that even nonclassicists will find the topic fascinating and a model for exploring topics where minimal documentation exists. Interrogating the available architectural and textual evidence, Handis provides new insights into the Pantainos library, while also situating it within what is known about other ancient libraries.Scarcity of sources is not unique to ancient times. The vast majority of the people who perform essential library work are invisible to historians, leaving behind few traces of their contributions. Bringing one such person to light is the mission of “The Bookbinding of Hortense P. Cantlie for McGill Library: Surfacing a Legacy of Invisible Labor in the Stacks” by Robin Desmeules. Drawing on insights from archival studies, labor studies, feminist theory, and the history of information, Desmeules addresses the human and social aspects of library work. This case study reveals the often-unacknowledged labor required to keep books in good repair for future generations.The turbulent period of the late 1960s and early 1970s receives attention from two authors in this issue. In “Banish the Stargazers? Joan Bodger, the Missouri State Library, and the Freedom to Read Foundation” Christopher Drew examines an important event in the history of intellectual freedom and librarianship. In 1969 Joan Bodger initiated a firestorm when she publicly supported nearby college students in their attempts to distribute a publication in their own voice. The episode tested the ability of nascent professional entities such as the Intellectual Freedom Committee and the Social Responsibilities Round Table to protect librarians who violated community expectations. While exposing the limited influence on local decisions, the case would help establish a new groundwork for protecting intellectual freedom in American librarianship.In “A Rapidly Escalating Demand: Academic Libraries and the Birth of Black Studies Programs,” Steven Knowlton traces how a number of academic libraries responded to the needs of newly created Black Studies programs, focusing particularly on behind-the-scenes decisions and efforts relating to collection-building. Exploring an understudied aspect of late-twentieth-century library history, this study offers new insights into the relationships between social movements and libraries during the 1960s and '70s. Knowlton's original essay received the Justin Winsor Library History Essay Award, presented annually by the Library History Round Table (http://www.ala.org/rt/lhrt/awards/windsor-essay-award). We encourage authors with unpublished library history essays to review the Winsor award criteria and submit their work. There is a monetary award as well as intellectual recognition (and the LCHS editors will work with you to get your essay published)!Many of the book reviews in this issue relate to themes of social change; highlighting works that trace the complex roles played by books and libraries during civil rights movements, revolutions, rebellions, wars, and nationalist awakenings. Other reviews look at reading, writing, and print cultures in various civilizations, from ancient Rome to modern Britain, prompting us to consider how different cultures likely shaped libraries, and the practice of librarianship, in their societiesWhen we look back at today's crisis, we will remember many examples of people coming together in fellowship for the common good, in a similarly pragmatic, creative, and courageous spirit as people of Churchill's time did. We want to thank our readers, authors, reviewers, book review editor Brett Spencer, and the Press staff for their amazing resiliency, goodwill, and strength. We commend you, and we are inspired by you. We are here to serve the library history community and are blessed to be able to do so.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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