Arrangement, description and presentation of the Fairlie Family collection at the Art Gallery of Ontario: a case study in collections management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis presents the results of an applied project in Collections Management, comprising the intellectual arrangement of the Fairlie Family fonds at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO), and the creation of a finding aid to facilitate future access and research. This project analyzes twelve Canadian family albums from the AGO’s collection of photography that were compiled by the Fairlie family between the years of 1880 and 1950. This project is comprised of three major parts: (1) an analytical paper, (2) extensive inventories and object-level cataloguing records, and (3) the creation of a finding aid for the family documents and related ephemera. The first part of this thesis consists of an analytical paper discussing the historical context of the albums and what they can tell us about the Fairlie family and the time and place in which they were created. The albums document the family’s exploits in photography, from mining in northern Ontario, various travel destinations, summer camping in Temagami, and life in upper-middle-class Toronto during the first half of the twentieth century. The practical component of this project includes genealogical research; detailed inventories for each of the twelve albums; the intellectual arrangement, rehousing, and creation of a finding aid for the textual records and related ephemera; and updated cataloguing records linking the albums with the Fairlie Family fonds in The Museum System database (TMS) so that both the photographic collection and contextual information are more accessible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".