MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323572466 · doi:10.7183/0002-7316.79.2.183

Localized Critical Theory as an Expression of Community Archaeology Practice: with an Example from Inuvialuit Elders of the Canadian Western Arctic

2014· article· en· W2323572466 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natasha Lyons

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Antiquity · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhalingArcticColonialismContext (archaeology)CapitalismSociologyArchaeologyPower (physics)HistoryEnvironmental ethicsGeographyEthnologyAnthropologyEcologyPoliticsPolitical scienceLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Critical theory has been little used in archaeology, despite its exceptional ability to understand social relations and circumstances, both past and present. In this paper, I develop the concept of a localized critical theory that connects broadscale global processes, such as colonialism and capitalism, to cultural processes that occur at the local level. This expression of archaeological practice has the power to hear, cultivate, and share the voices of individuals and communities as they speak about their respective histories, while recognizing and acknowledging their broader social context. I explore how lnuvialuit Elders' memories are portrayed and interpreted within the lnuvialuit Living History project, focusing particularly on their memories of traditional beluga-whaling in the Mackenzie Delta of Canada’s Western Arctic that were evoked through the identification and handling of ancestral whaling artifacts. I use localized critical theory to explore how Elders’ distinctive perspectives and experiences of beluga-whaling through the course of the mid-twentieth century articulate with and comment on wider historical processes and the agendas of the Canadian nation-state.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0440.036
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican AntiquitySame topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207