Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation
A Research Division of Carnegie Mellon University

Hunt Institute Archives Text Discovery Platform

Search a large and growing portion of our online collections, including handwritten documents.
PROTOTYPE

This prototype uses state-of-the-art artificial intelligence, including a vision-language model (VLM) capable of reading handwritten documents as well as typed and printed text, to create searchable transcriptions of digitized materials in the Hunt Institute Archives. This makes it possible to search the textual contents of individual pages, including material that may not be described in the archival catalog.

Use Keyword search for specific words, names, dates, scientific names, or phrases. Try Semantic search (experimental) to describe a topic, question, or kind of material when you do not know the exact wording used in the documents.

About the AI-generated transcriptions

The transcriptions are generated automatically from page images and may contain errors, especially with difficult handwriting, unusual names, multiple languages, image-quality problems, or complex layouts. They are intended primarily as a discovery aid rather than authoritative transcriptions.

Each result provides the generated transcription and links to the original digitized material and associated archival description so that readings can be checked against the source. The transcription workflow uses AI models run locally by the Hunt Institute.

About Keyword and Semantic search

Keyword search is the default and matches the wording in the transcriptions. Results contain all your terms. Use quotes for an exact phrase. Substring matching is supported, so aceae can find plant-family names ending in -aceae.

Semantic search (experimental) is useful when you know what kind of material you are looking for but do not know the words used in the documents. It ranks transcribed passages by similarity of meaning, so relevant results may not contain the exact words in your query.

Semantic queries can be broad research topics, descriptions of activities or relationships, or natural-language questions. For example:

Semantic search is not a chatbot: a question is used as a search query, and the system returns archival passages that appear conceptually related to it rather than generating an answer or summary. Short descriptions and ordinary research questions generally work better than lists of disconnected keywords. Quotation marks have no special meaning in Semantic mode. Cross-language matching may work in some cases, but it should not be treated as translation.

Keyword and Semantic search are complementary. Keyword search lets you require particular wording; Semantic search can surface differently worded passages about the same subject. Depending on the research question, trying both can reveal different useful material.

Open a result: use the prominent page-and-transcription link to see the metadata, PDF, and full transcription. Keyword-search terms are highlighted in the transcription.

Archives Collections Database (ArchivesSpace): the Collection, Item/Folder, and Digital Object links open the corresponding archival records. Collection-level dates describe the collection as a whole, not necessarily the specific item or page.

If a PDF does not load: on the detail page, use the Digital Object link, click “Go to file” in ArchivesSpace, and navigate to the page number shown here.

Current limitations
  • Automated transcriptions can contain missing or incorrect text or unintended repetition. Difficult handwriting, image quality, unusual layouts, and multiple languages can reduce accuracy. Always consult the original page image when an exact reading matters.
  • Semantic search remains experimental. Its rankings are an additional discovery aid, not a complete or definitive set of relevant results, and highly ranked pages can sometimes be only broadly related.
  • This is an active prototype. Search coverage, transcriptions, functionality, and the interface may continue to change as additional archival material is processed and the system is improved.

← Back to results

Page 3 · DO #4222 · 182_Goodspeed_Bx3FF62_r

Collection
Thomas Harper Goodspeed (1887–1966) papers
Item/Folder
Research Proposal: National Science Foundation; Biological and Medical Sciences Division, 1957
Digital Object
DO #4222, page 3
Collection-level dates
1923–1963
Open PDF at page 3 ↗

Page transcription

T. H. Goodspeed Professor of Botany and Director, Botanical Garden,
University of California, Berkeley (Emeritus, July 1,
1954; recalled to full time service to June 30, 1957)

Date of birth: May 17, 1887

Education: Brown Univ., AB 1909; Univ. California, PhD 1912

Honorary Degrees: ScD Brown Univ. 1940; Doctor Univ. La Plata 1939

Fellowships: Amer. Scan Foundation, Scandinavia, 1922-23;
Guggenheim Foundation, Europe, 1930-31, South America, 1935

Foreign travel: Europe, 6 visits, 4 for advanced training and research;
South America, Director of 5 Univ. Calif. Botanical Garden
Expeditions, 1935-53

Decorations: Com. Orden al Merito, Chile, 1952; Medallist, Paris, 1955

Major research programs and accomplishments:

I. The Genus Nicotiana -- species origins and evolution, taxonomy (1912-56)
Accumulation of a living collection of all but 4 of the 60 species
and many varieties and mapping of their distribution was the
primary objective of my South American botanical expeditions
(cf. above). This unique collection of the species of a
characteristic genus of flowering plants permitted exhaustive
investigations (a) of their comparative morphology, (b) of the
number, morphology and meiotic behavior of their chromosomes
and (c) of their cytogenetic relationships. The information
accumulated on these fundamental indications of species origins
and evolution, plus evidence on geographic distribution, was
presented in a monograph (cf. next page, Publications, 1954)
in which the origin, evolution and current relationships of all
60 species was charted.

II. The character and distribution of elements of the vegetation of
temperate South America
I have had a total of over 4 years contact with the floras
of the Andes and adjacent areas and their distribution,
particularly in Peru, Chile and Argentina but also in Colombia,
Bolivia and Uruguay (cf. attached map). Over 60,000 herbarium
specimens (some 13,000 numbers) were collected in the regions
traversed by myself and assistants, primarily in botanically
obscure areas. Many little known or previously unknown taxa
and much new distribution evidence was obtained. From this
combined evidence accumulated over the past 20 years certain
postulates, based upon the geologic history of the Andes,
concerning fundamental phytogeographical problems in temperate
South America have been derived. A number of areas botanically
little known have been shown by preliminary study to be critical
for evaluation of these postulates. The accumulation of much
additional evidence via further field work in these key areas
and correlated studies in South American herbaria is essential
(cf. attached project).