MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Myth, Primogeniture and Long Distance Trade‐Friends in Northwest New Britain, Papua New Guinea

2007· article· en· W2074153032 on OpenAlexaff
Naomi M. McPherson

Bibliographic record

VenueOceania · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirstbornMythologyNew guineaEthnographyVitalityCeremonySociologyReputationModernityColonialismBaptismHistoryEthnologyMedia studiesAnthropologyLawSocial sciencePolitical scienceDemographyTheologyClassicsArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The origins of ceremonies for firstborn children and long distance trade networks are embedded in Bariai mythology and cosmology. Based on my ethnographic research and the ethnographic reportage contained in the Australian colonial Patrol Officers' Reports, this paper explores the pre‐ and post‐contact trade networks of Bariai parents as they pursue a reputation for ‘renown’ by entering into complex trade‐friendships (sobo) and exchanges for the necessary wealth to undertake one (of seventeen) firstborn ceremony, the mata pau or ‘new eye.’ My intent in this paper is to (1) reiterate that a people and their culture can only be understood within regional systems of relationships; (2) indicate the manner in which long distance trade‐friendships were created and maintained over a long period of time; (3) show how these socio‐economic institutions are embedded in Bariai cosmology and thus made meaningful; (4) attest to the vitality and importance of these systems despite the impact of modernity, missionization and money.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOceaniaSame topicPacific and Southeast Asian StudiesFrench-language works237,207