SERENA KESHAVJEE (ed.), The Art of Ectoplasm: Encounters with Winnipeg’s Ghost Photographs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For someone with only the most peripheral knowledge of the Hamilton Family Fonds, the perceptive, interdisciplinary prism of this book was a fortunate introduction.Editor Serena Keshavjee has brought together a diverse group of academics and archivists who, in a series of nine essays, collectively provide context and a critical gaze that forces us to look carefully at what this fonds, held at the University of Manitoba Archives & Special Collections (UMASC), helps to document.As such, this book should be of considerable interest to a wide audience.For archivists specifically, it also provides a case study in acquisition and outreach.Thomas Glendenning (T.G.) Hamilton and his wife Lillian were a professional middle-class couple living in Winnipeg at the turn of the 20th century and during its early decades.T.G. was a doctor, Lillian was a nurse, and their surviving offspring were all university educated (pp.123-27).The Hamilton Family Fonds is extensive and consists of glass plate negatives and slides; photographs; albums; and various textual records including minutes, correspondence, and ephemera (p.168).It reflects their interest and research in various aspects of psychic phenomenon: "rappings, clairvoyance, trance states and trance charts, telekinesis, wax molds, bell-ringing." 1 Among this material are photographs and minutes from séances held in the Hamilton home.1
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".