Bibliographic record
Abstract
<JATS1:p>Here is the first-ever comprehensive guide to archival concepts, principles, and practices.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Encyclopedia of Archival Science features 154 entries, which address every aspect of archival professional knowledge. These entries range from traditional ideas (like appraisal and provenance) to today’s challenges (digitization and digital preservation). They present the thoughts of leading luminaries like Ernst Posner, Margaret Cross-Norton, and Philip Brooks as well as those of contemporary authors and rising scholars. Historical and ethical components of practice are infused throughout the work.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Edited by Luciana Duranti from the University of British Columbia and Patricia C. Franks from San José State University, this landmark work was overseen by an editorial board comprised of leading archivists and archival educators from every continent: Adrian Cunningham (Queensland State Archives, Australia), Fiorella Foscarini (University of Toronto and University of Amsterdam), Pat Galloway (University of Texas at Austin), Shadrack Katuu (International Atomic Energy Agency), Giovanni Michetti (University of Rome La Sapienza), Ken Thibodeau (National Archives and Records Administration, US), and Geoffrey Yeo (University College London, UK).</JATS1: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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".