A machine-readable catalogue of the Tsiolkovsky papers (fond 555, Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences), and a way to measure how well its handwriting can be read
Vladimir Beskorovainyi
Abstract
The personal archive of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky (1857-1935) is held as fond 555 of the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The archive scanned the fond and published the images, but with no queryable catalogue, no full-text search and no dataset: the holdings can only be browsed one page at a time. This paper describes a machine-readable catalogue of all 2,019 files and 51,008 scans, a dating for 1,969 files taken from the archive's own descriptions, a page-level classification of every scan into handwriting and typescript, and a machine transcription of the fond in full: all 2,019 files and all 51,008 scans. It also reports a way to measure handwritten-text-recognition accuracy in an archive with no ground truth. Archives of the typewriter era often preserve one text twice, as manuscript and as a typed copy; transcribing both and comparing isolates the reading error, since source and pipeline are identical and only page difficulty differs. Across 1,759 such pairs from 224 files, two readings of a handwritten page agree on a median 37% of words and share a longest verbatim run of a median 10 words; the median is unchanged from the 294 pairs of the first version, on a sample six times larger. On two files that also have a published edition the estimate can be checked against ground truth: it is unbiased to within a percentage point and ranks pages as the truth does (rank correlation 0.92 where the edition is a faithful witness). This bounds use: two variants of one work here share 19% of words, below the rate at which two readings of a single page agree, so the redactions cannot be collated word by word at this quality. That negative result is reported as such, and the constraint is built into the tool.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Monitoring and Discovering Reward Hacking with Internal Representations during LLM Evaluations
Leon Bergen, Usha Bhalla, Andrew Lee et al.
Reporting Practice Matters: The Impact of Reference Choice on Chest X-ray Report Evaluation
Daniel P. Jeong, Charles Q. Li, Hossein Hosseiny et al.
Long-Lived Characters, Local Inference: Incremental Memory Maintenance for Game NPCs
Zimu Xu
Beyond Outcomes: Dual-View Relational Learning for Efficient Agent Benchmarking
Xinshuai Guo, Junjie Wu, Dolly Deng et al.
How Much is a Human Right Worth? ECtHR-NPD: A Benchmark for Predicting Non-Pecuniary Damage Awards
Yanyi Pu, Damian A. Gonzalez-Salzberg, Zheng Yuan et al.
Structured Claim-Level Discourse Representations for Dense Health Narratives
Farnoushsadat Nilizadeh, Elham Pourabbas Vafa, Shirin Nilizadeh et al.