Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provincial government involvement in archaeology underwent consider able changes during the 1980s. Those changes primarily reflected a process of role clarification and definition stimulated by a number of external pressures on the government during that time. In particular, two areas of concern coincided to create a need to critically examine all existing government programmes. These included the major economic downturn experienced by the province in the early part of the decade and increasing demands from First Nations to become more directly involved in issues concerning their cultures. Public expectations regarding government archaeological programmes had been raised throughout the 1970s, but the ability for government to continue to deliver programmes dropped dramatically in the early 1980s. For example, at the close of a decade which saw annual double-digit inflation, the provincial Archaeology Branch was operating with a budget only 6 per cent higher than when the decade began. By 1983, the motto do more with less was commonly heard in government circles. Coincident with the diminishing capacity for government programmes, many aboriginal people began to escalate demands to have long-standing land claims and self-government issues recognized and addressed. Numer ous legal and political strategies employed to achieve those goals had, and will continue to have, significant impacts on the government's roles in archaeology. They will also continue to influence non-government agen cies, institutions, and individuals engaged in academic research and re source management. ROLES
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".