MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944386448

The Inuit in southern Labrador: a view from Snack Cove

2005· dissertation· en· W1944386448 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalie Brewster

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovePeriod (music)GeographyArchaeologyFrontierArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores the nature of Inuit occupations in southern Labrador, and their contacts with Europeans during the 17th century, based upon excavations from Snack Cove 1 and Snack Cove 3. Due to a paucity of archaeological investigations of the Inuit in southern Labrador, there is little known about how the Inuit lived in this area, and the form of their interactions with Europeans during the early Contact Period. Data from Snack Cove has been analyzed and compiled with ethnohistoric data to address the objectives of this research, and to situate the occupations at Snack Cove within the long term culture history of the Inuit in Labrador. The results of this research have shown that the Inuit occupations in southern Labrador during the 17th century were much the same as those in northern Labrador, with the exception that they are a part of the southernmost frontier of Inuit expansion. Further, the results of this analysis show that the nature of Inuit contact with Europeans was such that a large quantity of European materials flowed into Inuit exchange networks, but that the flow of European ideas, information and beliefs was less frequent during the early Contact Period. Through this research, it has been possible to portray the central role of the Inuit, and their decision making in the unfolding of events during the Contact Period.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207