Carl Borden and archaeology in British Columbia : an interactive history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carl Borden has been designated "Grandfather of B.C. archaeology" (Carlson 1979: 233). I present an aspect of his claim to this title by focusing on his important contribution to the efforts made in the 1950's, 60's and early 70's to provide a forum amenable to the pursuit of archaeological research in British Columbia. My thesis is, therefore, primarily a contribution to the literature which addresses itself to understanding Borden's place in the history of archaeology in British Columbia. As such, it will not only interest those archaeologists and anthropologists who knew and worked with Borden, but also a wider audience of Canadian anthropologists and archaeologists who are concerned with understanding the significance of the persons and institutions discussed in "local histories" within the broader framework of the history of Canadian anthropology. In presenting history, I also engage in its creation. My thesis reflects my self^consciousness in producing an account where Borden's point of yiew Cas expressed in the literature and a series of interviews) and my interpretation of his point of view are negotiated. I call this process of negotiation an :interactive history. It is through this process that I discover an important aspect of the significance of Borden to archaeology in British Columbia. Therefore, it is a process which will be of relevance to those anthropologists interested in the social construction of knowledge. Presenting history and being self-conscious about how we discover history are part of a reflexive approach to furthering an understanding of ourselves and our Western Culture. My thesis advances this approach in two ways. First, by applying the anthropological method of fieldwork, traditionally applied to other cultures, to make a statement about an institution - archaeology in British Columbia - which emerges from my own culture. Second, by confronting this statement and making its formulation explicit.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".