A First Look at the Acquisition and Appraisal of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Fonds: or, SELECT * FROM VANOC _Records AS Archives WHERE Value=âtrueâ;
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les Archives de la ville de Vancouver travaillent depuis 2008 dvelopper des archives numriques.La plus grande partie du financement et le sentiment d'ur gence face ce projet furent lis l'obligation de la ville de prserver les documents du Comit d'organisation des Jeux olympiques d'hiver de 2010 (COVAN).Ce texte dcrit quelques-unes des difficults rencontres l'acquisition des documents numriques du COVAN.Il documente aussi les efforts des Archives pour faire correspondre les diff rentes tches lies l'acquisition et l'valuation du processus de travail reli au trai tement des documents numriques, qui est limit par les technologies utilises et donc moins flexible que pour les documents analogues.Les complexits sont dues la fois l'environnement technique utilis par les crateurs des documents et aux limites im poses par la solution de prservation numrique des Archives.Ce texte examine aussi certaines faons dont les activits archivistiques de base peuvent diffrer des pratiques bien tablies quand on les transpose dans un environnement numrique.ABSTRACT Since 2008, the City of Vancouver Archives has been working to develop a digital archives.Much of the funding and accompanying urgency were linked to the City's obligation to preserve the records of the Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC).This paper describes some of the difficulties encountered in acquiring VANOC's digital records and the Archives' strug gles to map the different tasks involved in acquisition and appraisal against the digital processing workflow, which is constrained by the technology used, and therefore less flexible than for analogue records.Complexities are due both to the records creator's technical environment as well as limitations imposed by the Archives' digital preser vation solution.The paper also considers some of the ways in which these core archival activities may diverge from long-established practices when moving into the digital environment.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".