ʔeləw’k’w– Belongings: A Tangible Interface for Intangible Cultural Heritage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ʔeləw’k’ w – Belongings is an interactive tabletop using a tangible user interface to explore intangible cultural heritage. The table was designed for the c’əsnaʔəm, the city before the city exhibition. This exhibition is a partnership of three major institutions in Vancouver, BC, exploring the significant ancient village site on which part of Vancouver was built, as well as Musqueam culture and community today. The tabletop uses replicas of Musqueam belongings excavated from c’əsnaʔəm, as well as contemporary objects that are a part of everyday Musqueam life to access information about the long history of salmon fishing and the continuity of related knowledge at c’əsnaʔəm. The design of ʔeləw’k’ w – Belongings highlights the tensions between fragmentation and continuity that are central to discussions of access and preservation of intangible cultural heritage in the digital age. In this paper we discuss the tangible tabletop interface as a response to the desire to reconnect fragmented collections and physical belongings from c’əsnaʔəm with Musqueam intangible cultural knowledge.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.003 |
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".