MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1879654481 · doi:10.7202/007646ar

Reconsidering Inuit presence in southern Labrador

2004· article· en· W1879654481 on OpenAlex
Marianne P. Stopp

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayArchaeologyArchaeological evidenceGeographyFur tradeForagingPeriod (music)HistoryGeologyPaleontologyEconomic historyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reconsiders the century-old question of Inuit presence south of Hamilton Inlet and the contention that it was a short-term presence for the purpose of trading with Europeans. A summary of archival sources largely unavailable in English in conjunction with known and previously unreported archaeological evidence are the basis for a reexamination of the nature and extent of Inuit presence in the southern region. A discussion of the Inuit hunting and gathering way of life alongside the archival and archaeological evidence suggests that there is reasonable evidence of winter and summer presence, of family groups rather than trade parties, of extended habitation rather than short-term trade forays, and of a way of life that incorporated European goods but remained based on traditional seasonal foraging patterns. This update, whilst incorporating previously unpublished archaeological data for the region between Blanc Sablon and Sandwich Bay, supports the original contention presented in Martijn and Clermont, eds (1980) that Inuit did inhabit the southern region prior to the late eighteenth century.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.246 · 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