MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407108731

Between Colonial and Indigenous Archaeologies: Legal and Extra-legal Ownership of the Archaeological Past in North America

2003· article· en· W2407108731 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Archaeology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnologyArchaeologyIndigenousState (computer science)ColonialismHistoryHumanitiesContext (archaeology)Art
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For over a century and a half, archaeologists have fought to protect the archaeological record from impacts caused by looting, antiquities trafficking, development, and other threats to the preservation of, in effect, the raw material of the archaeological enterprise. But as post-colonial sensibilities slowly permeate North American society, descendant communities have challenged the basis for both archaeologists to assert an exclusive stewardship of the archaeological record, and the state's authority to endow this exclusivity to archaeologists. This paper reviews the historical context from which archaeologists have obtained in legislation a privileged trust from the state to manage and protect the archaeological record in North America, and the challenges First Nations have made to being excluded from their ancestor's past. While the changing balance in the politics of archaeology in North America is undermining archaeologists' exclusivity, it also offers opportunities for archaeology to become more inclusive and relevant in society. Resume. Depuis plus de cent cinquante ans, les archeologues se sont battus pour proteger le temoignage archeologique du pillage, du trafic d'antiquites et de toutes autres sortes de menaces a la preservation de ce qui est, de fait, le materiel de base de la recherche archeologique. Mais, alors que les sensibilites post-coloniales infiltrent peu a peu la societe nord-americaine, les bases qui permettaient aux archeologues de revendiquer l'intendance exclusive des documents archeologiques ainsi que l'autorite de l'Etat qui octroyait aux archeologues cette exclusivite, sont serieusement mises en question par les communautes descendantes. Cette communication passe en revue le contexte historique a partir duquel les archeologues ont obtenu par legislation de l'Etat l'exclusivite dans la gestion et la protection le temoignage archeologique en Amerique du Nord, et la facon dont les Premieres Nations ont ete evincees de l'acces au passe de leurs ancetres. Les changements de rapports de force dans la politique de l'archeologie en Amerique du Nord tendent a diminuer l'exclusivite des archeologues, mais ils permettent aussi a cette science de s'integrer plus globalement et significativement dans la societe.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.202 · 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