MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973584059 · doi:10.1080/13527250500235633

A Polluting Concept of Culture: Native Artefacts Contaminated with Toxic Preservatives

2005· article· en· W1973584059 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Heritage Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepatriationCultural heritageContext (archaeology)Cultural assimilationEnvironmental ethicsHistoryArchaeologyImmigration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the practical and theoretical fallout of the toxic methods used by museum conservators to preserve native artefacts and regalia. These conservation practices, dating to the late 19th and early 20th centuries, were undertaken before the age of museum professionalisation and within a larger context of cultural assimilation. Many of these chemical preservatives produce the same harmful effects in humans as they do in the organisms they were designed to eradicate. As these contaminated artefacts are repatriated, members of native communities who attempt to reintegrate them into ceremonial and daily practice are put at significant health risk. Not only do these pollutants undermine the stated goals of repatriation but they also stand as a literal instance of the way in which a hegemonic and interpreting culture has metaphorically contaminated the culture it has purported to preserve and display.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.262 · 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