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 145 · DO #4708 · 231_Rogers_Bx3FF31_r

Collection
David James Rogers (1918–2007) papers
Item/Folder
Graduate Students Garrido, Johnston, McArthur & McCarthy, 1974–1979
Digital Object
DO #4708, page 145
Collection-level dates
1948–1977
Open PDF at page 145 ↗

Page transcription

(1949). Untersuchungen über Pseudogamie und Sexualität einiger Potentillen.
Ber. Schweiz. bot. Ges. 59:409-420.

(1954). Weitere beiträge zur Genetik der Aposporie pseudogamer Potentillen.
Arch. Julius Klaus-Stift. 29(3/4):223-233.

(1960). Untersuchungen über die Evolution pseudogamer Arten. Ber. schweiz.
bot. Ges. 70:113-125.

Rydberg, P.A. (1896). Notes on Potentilla. I. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 23:244-248;
II. op.cit. 23:259-265; III. op.cit. 23:301-306; IV. op.cit. 23:394-399;
V. op.cit. 23:429-435. (1897) VI. op.cit. 21:1-13.

(1898). A Monograph of the North American Potentilleae. Mem. Dept. Bot.
Columbia Univ. 2:1-223.

Complete literature, descriptions (shortened for Mexican species). 124
species in Potentilla s.lat., of which 106 in Potentilla s.str. Treatment
reasonable, but published just before considerable exploration, especially
of W North America.

(1903). Rosaceae: Potentilleae, in North American Flora 22(3/4):268-377.

Rydberg's last systematic work in this genus. 215 species in Potentilla s.lat.,
of which 176 are in Potentilla s.str. Generic concepts just now gaining
favor; species distinctions almost useless (based on "unit characters") and
his system for Potentilla has been justly ignored. Many sections have
exactly the same descriptions as in 1898, but there are 70 new species!

(1910). Notes on Rosaceae. III. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 37:375-386; IV.
op.cit. 37:487-502; (1911). V. op.cit. 38:79-89.

Discussion of genera and their types: type of Potentilla is P. reptans L.
(accepted by all subsequent workers). Notes that Wolf (1908) antedates
Rydberg (1908); the rest is a half-hearted review of Rydberg (1908) in
comparison with Wolf (1908), with some minor notes and adjustments.

Sax, K. (1931). The origin and relationships of the Pomoideae. J. Arnold.
Arbor. 12:2-22.

Summary of chromosome numbers in Rosaceae; discussion of cytology, especially
as regards Pomoideae, in which x = 17. Consideration of reproduction in
family leads to hypothesis about evolution of subfamilies.

(1933). The origin of the Pomoideae. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30:147-150.
Summary of Sax (1931); no data presented.

Sorokina, T.P. (1974). Morfologicheskoye i tsitologicheskoye izucheniye potomstva
F1 ot skreshchivaniya mezhdu razlichnymy vidami Potentilla. In Petrov, D.F.,
ed., Apomikticheskoye Razmnozheniye i Geterozis. "Nauka", Novosibirsk, pp.
155-161.

Morphological and cytological investigations of the F1 progeny from hybridization
among various species of Potentilla, from the book, Apomictic
Reproduction and Heterosis.

Troll, W. (1935). Vergleichende Morphologie der Fiederblätter. Nova Acta Leopold.
bd. 2, abt. 3/4(4):315-455.

Comparative morphology of pinnate leaves, based on developmental studies. He
differentiates between basipetal-pinnate, acropetal-pinnate, and divergent-
pinnate leaves; very complete discussion of many cases.

Watson, S. (1873). Revision of the extra-tropical North American species of the
genus Potentilla (excluding Sibbaldia, Horkelia, and Ivesia). Proc. Amer.
Acad. Arts Sci. 8:549-573.