Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is about a collection of 78 hawk bill clasp knife blades discovered in a 1713 context from the site of the Intendaht's Palace in Quebec City. What makes this collection so interesting is that these blades have been particularly well preserved, making it very easy to read the marks of the cutlers who fabricated them. In the first part of this paper, the author describes the blades systematically and reviews the sources and archaeological literature about them. Then, he tries to demonstrate that these knives, with their unusually shaped blades, could have been used to work on animal pelts and that it is therefore not surprising to find them in contexts associated with the fur trade. Resume Cette etude porte sur un depot de 78 lames de couteaux pliants a pointe rabattue, mis au jour sur le site du Palais de l'intendant, a Quebec, dans un contexte date de 1713. L'interet de ce depot est que les lames ont ete tres bien conservees et qu'on peut y lire tres clairement les marques des couteliers qui les ont fabriquees. Dans un premier temps, l'auteur decrit systematiquement ces lames et essaie d'en retrouver la trace dans les documents d'epoque et la litterature archeologique. Puis il tente de demontrer que ces couteaux, avec leur lame de forme un peu speciale, auraient bien pu servir au travail des peaux d'animaux et qu'il n'est donc pas etonnant de les retrouver associes a des contextes de traite des fourrures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".