MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7006869327

What we have lost: What we stand to lose : The future of archives and archivists in Canada

2020· article· en· W7006869327 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine Biology and Environmental Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DysgeusiaHyporeflexiaLiquationDiafiltrationProteogenomicsDemotion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Readers of the Bulletin will recall that in March 2012 the federal government announced cancellation of the $1.7 million National Archival Development Program (NADP) and cuts in staff and services at Library and Archives Canada. These cuts were widely criticized in the heritage and historical research communities as they seemed to threaten the archival system in Canada built up since the 1970s. On January 16, 2013 the Archives Association of Ontario East/Est Chapter sponsored a panel in Ottawa under the title “What We Have Lost: What We Stand to Lose: The Future of Archives and Archivists in Canada.”

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0670.027
Scholarly communication0.0400.013
Open science0.0070.014
Research integrity0.0080.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicMarine Biology and Environmental ChemistryFrench-language works237,207