Documenting the Restoration Process: The Documentaries of Sara Gómez at the Vulnerable Media Lab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This thesis is an applied case study wherein provisional restoration documentation tools were developed for the Vulnerable Media Lab at Queen's University. These tools were developed to support the ethical digital restoration of documentaries made by Afro-Cuban revolutionary filmmaker Sara Gómez, whose original film negatives and some prints were lent to the VML by the Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematográficos (ICAIC). FIAF's Code of Ethics calls for archivists engaged in restoration to "faithfully and fully" document any technical and aesthetic choices which have been made for future archivists and researchers, and in order to guarantee reversibility. The Gómez films are the VML's first restoration project, thus this thesis suggests practices that can be added to the VML's established workflows as necessary, and help ensure accurate restoration records. Besides the ethics and practices of digital film restoration, this thesis examines Sara Gómez's complicated place in Cuban film history.</p>
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".