Arquivistica pós-moderna,diplomática arquivística e arquivística integrada: novas abordagens para a construção de uma disciplina contemporânea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No final do seculo XX, nao foram apresentadas a sociedade apenas novas formas de producao documental e novas tecnologias de informacao, mas tambem um novo desafio aos profissionais da informacao, que viram-se despreparados para lidar com documentos em um contexto de producao, organizacao e uso ate entao desconhecido. Logo, esses profissionais, mais especificamente os arquivistas, tiveram que desenvolver novas abordagens para organizar o conhecimento arquivistico contemporâneo, produzido agora tambem em meio eletronico. Neste sentido, emergem no Canada, nos anos 80, tres novas abordagens que buscam – por meio da interdisciplinaridade, da reinterpretacao de conceitos e principios basilares da area e da reinvencao de antigas ciencias e disciplinas – responder aos novos desafios e as novas demandas colocadas ao arquivista neste novo contexto. Sao elas: a Arquivistica Pos-Moderna, a Diplomatica Arquivistica e a Arquivistica Integrada. Desta feita, este trabalho apresenta e caracteriza essas tres novas abordagens arquivisticas para, posteriormente, tracar um quadro com as caracteristicas ideais de uma Arquivistica Contemporânea, capaz de dar conta de um novo contexto de producao, organizacao e uso da informacao orgânica registrada, respondendo as demandas e aos desafios colocados aos arquivistas contemporâneos.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".