MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108407474 · doi:10.14430/arctic238

The Mackenzie Inuit Whale Bone Industry: Raw Material, Tool Manufacture, Scheduling, and Trade

2009· article· en· W2108407474 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Matthew Betts

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhaleRaw materialBusinessFisheryEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bones of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) were used by Mackenzie Inuit groups in producing a number of items essential to transportation and procurement. However, the whale bone industry, and its relationship to Mackenzie Inuit economic and social systems, is poorly understood. A recently excavated archaeological assemblage from McKinley Bay, Northwest Territories, provides a record of intensive Nuvugarmiut whale bone tool manufacture, which can be used to reconstruct a reduction sequence. Bowhead bone reduction at McKinley Bay focused on ribs, which were transversely worked into large sections. Cortical blanks were isolated from central rib sections, but proximal and distal rib sections were treated directly as blanks and preforms for the production of large durable tools, such as harpoon heads, adze sockets, mattock blades, and picks. The intensive whale bone reduction at McKinley Bay was part of a broader gearing-up strategy focused on the manufacture and repair of sleds and harpoons needed for the late winter migration and spring seal hunt. More generally, because the whale bone industry was intimately related to the bowhead hunt and its proceeds, it may provide fundamental insights about key aspects of coastal whaling societies, such as social organization, redistribution, and inter-territorial trade.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207