The Reports by the Juries: A Finding Aid for a Publication From the Great Exhibition of 1851 in the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Produced by the Royal Commission for the Great Exhibition of 1851, the four-volume Reports by the Juries is illustrated with 154 salted paper prints from negatives by Claude-Marie Ferrier (1811-1889) and Hugh Owen (1808-1897) and document the exhibits and the Crystal Palace building. 137 copies of the Reports were produced and distributed internationally to individuals and countries that participated in the exhibition. This presentation set, which also includes the Official Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue, the Reports to the Crown, and a presentation set of exhibition medals, belonged to Sir William Crossman (1830-1901) of the Royal Engineers. A specially designed wooden cabinet houses the set. This thesis project is divided into two parts: Part I describes the process of researching and creating the finding aid; Part II is the finding aid itself, containing ten sections addressing historical background information, photographers' biographies, photographic processes, a complete illustrated catalogue of the photographs, an analysis of the photographs, provenance, and a preliminary list of other copies of the publication in public institutions.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.103 | 0.017 |
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".