Neither Seen Nor Heard: Looking for Children in Northwest Coast Archaeology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les enfants constituaient une partie importante de toutes les populations du passe, mais ils sont encore souvent negliges par la recherche archeologique. Les raisons de cette absence tiennent a des obstacles a la fois conceptuels et pratiques: la transposition au present de la conception euro-americaine des enfants, vus comme dependants et passifs, et la difficulte d'identifier clairement les signatures archeologiques associees aux enfants-en particulier dans les contextes prehistoriques. Dans cet article, je me concentre sur l'archeologie de la region de la Cote Nord-Ouest, ou l'on ne trouve que des recits ethnographiques limites concernant les enfants, et quasiment aucune mention d'eux dans les rapports archeologiques. Apres avoir expose les facteurs qui contribuent a rendre les enfants invisibles dans l'interpretation archeologique en general, j'avance que rien ne justifie le presuppose que les enfants de la Cote Nord-Ouest d'autrefois aient ete improductifs. Je presente des recherches archeologiques et ethno-archeologiques-menees sur la Cote Nord-Ouest et dans d'autres regions-susceptibles d'indiquer la voie a l'avenir pour des analyses de la vie des enfants de la Cote Nord-Ouest dans le passe. Il est possible, en particulier, d'utiliser des modeles de cueillette et des analyses fauniques pour refleter les strategies de subsistance propres aux enfants.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".