MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226045891 · doi:10.1093/jhc/fhac018

Prince Albert’s donations to the library of the South Kensington Museum

2022· article· en· W4226045891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frances Willis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the History of Collections · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionQuarter (Canadian coin)The artsPromotion (chess)Art historyVisual artsLibrary scienceArtPolitical scienceHistoryLawArchaeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prince Albert’s drive to encourage the United Kingdom to forge ahead in the applied arts and industry has been well documented. The masterminding of the Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations of 1851, and its legacy in the form of the South Kensington quarter, are testament to his endeavours. Albert’s imprint left behind through his interaction with libraries, and the reasoning behind his choice of manuscript and printed book donations to these institutions are areas that provide a subtler avenue of exploration. Taking as a case-study the donations he made to the South Kensington Museum library, now in the National Art Library at the Victoria and Albert Museum, while also looking further afield, I explore here Albert’s contribution of texts made available for researchers. The donations demonstrate, particularly, his promotion of the capacity for progress through research in science and the arts, and the potential for these fields to be connected and utilized through industry.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualmedium
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.009

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.151 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Theoretical or conceptual
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the History of CollectionsSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207