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 118 · DO #1560 · 40_Slate_Bx3FF1r

Collection
George Lewis Slate (1899–1976) papers on Arnold Arboretum
Item/Folder
Articles, Memos, Pamphlets, and Booklets, 1949–1959, n.d.
Digital Object
DO #1560, page 118
Collection-level dates
1949–1967, n.d.
Open PDF at page 118 ↗

Page transcription

-3-

After the adoption of the Bailey Report in 1946 and the integration of the work of the Arboretum with that of the Division of Biology, two Chairmen of the botanical activities of Harvard were appointed,--Professor Bailey in charge of the "morphological area", and Professor Mangelsdorf in charge of the "experimental area". In Professor Mangelsdorf's report of 1951-52 it is stated that: "The work of the Arboretum in phytopathology, cytology, wood anatomy and genetics is integrated with that of the Biological Laboratories in Cambridge."

Organized field classes were started at the Arboretum in the early 1880's and were taught by Professor Jack for several decades. This work has been continued to the present time and in recent decades the field classes were taught by Dr. Wyman. In 1955 Dr. Howard added courses in plant identification, propagation, plant breeding and botany, which were taught by various members of the staff. These courses are given at the popular level and for adult classes primarily interested in horticulture,--usually eight lectures per course with some laboratory or field work.

In 1926 Professor Ames initiated a teaching program at Harvard. Certain of the Arboretum staff members were affiliated with the Department of Botany and gave courses primarily for graduate students, usually one-half course for one semester every second year. Courses in economic botany were given by Professor Ames, in forest pathology by Dr. Faull, in ecology by Professor Raup, in cytology by Professor Sax and in