MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1575147025 · doi:10.14288/bcs.v0i180.184165

Barking up the Right Tree: Understanding Birch Bark Artifacts from the Canadian Plateau, British Columbia

2013· article· en· W1575147025 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBark (sound)Plateau (mathematics)ArchaeologyGeographyPrehistoryForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several birch bark containers and other birch bark artifacts made by prehistoric First Nations have been encountered during archaeological excavations on the Canadian Plateau of British Columbia. From these discoveries, it is apparent that birch bark technologies were of major importance to First Nations, yet little attention has been paid to them as a category of artifacts. Ethnographic records from the Canadian Plateau indicate that birch bark basketry was consistently made by women. Thus, birch bark baskets provide a tool with which to make women and their work visible in the archaeological record. Birch bark baskets were important for food collection and storage, and appear in burials and girls puberty rituals. Here we describe two Late Period birch bark baskets and their contents (approximately dating to the Plateau Horizon 2400–1200 BP) from sites near Lillooet, BC and illustrate how birch bark was closely associated with women, both economically and spiritually.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it