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:

plant collecting and fieldwork in South America medicinal, culinary, or other traditional uses of plants chromosomes and plant classification early herbals and botanical illustrations botanical institutions exchanging plants, seeds, and specimens microscopy and photomicrography in botanical research How did botanists and gardeners introduce plants from one region to another? grafting, budding, and propagation of tropical fruit crops

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 #4295 · 131_Fogg_Bx2FF29_r

Collection
John Milton Fogg Jr. (1898–1982) papers
Item/Folder
Jennison, Harry Milliken, 2 October 1934 – 19 January 1935
Digital Object
DO #4295, page 3
Collection-level dates
1923–1981
Open PDF at page 3 ↗

Page transcription

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
KNOXVILLE
DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY

October 10, 1934

Professor John M. Fogg, Jr.
Botanical Laboratory
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Dear Professor Fogg:

My answer to yours of the 2nd instance has been delayed
a few days on account of the pressure of other duties coming
the opening of the academic year. Please be assured however that
I am interested in what you have suggested and I trust that we may
enter into an exchange agreement.

During the past four or five months we have accumulated
a large number of nice specimens; some through collection and some
through exchange. Even though we are rather heavily obligated at
the present time in the matter of exchange, I believe we have suf-
ficient material so that it will be proper and safe for us to
enter into an exchange with you. Just how far we can continue
this arrangement may not be predicted just now but I am sure we
can send you 100 or 200 specimens in return for an equal number of
your New Jersey and Pennsylvania plants. It is understood that
we are primarily interested in specimens of the seed plants and
ferns. If you have in mind the desirability of trading liverworts,
mosses, lichen, fungi, etc., you might let me know and I will take
the matter up with Dr. Hesler and Mr. Sharp. My preference would
be to exchange unmounted and fully identified specimens with origi-
nal labels. As indicated above, we would prefer to have New Jersey
and Pennsylvania plants and in particular, I might add that we
would like plants from the mountainous parts of Pennsylvania.
However, plants from the coastal plain region and even from the
New England states would be accepted. Such things as ubiquitous
weeds would be the least acceptable of all.

Thanking you for your interest and suggestion, I am,

Sincerely yours,

H. M. Jennison
Professor of Botany