MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462528474 · doi:10.7202/1036079ar

Identity markers: Interpreting sod-house occupation in Sandwich Bay, Labrador

2016· article· en· W2462528474 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Lisa Rankin

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArchaeologyBayHuman settlementGeographyShoreSettlement (finance)ExcavationEthnic groupOceanographyGeologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Documentary evidence suggests that Inuit were present in the Strait of Belle Isle by the late 16th century, yet the archaeological evidence for Inuit settlement in southern Labrador is sparse. Inuit sites are difficult to recognize south of Nunatsiavut, where 19th-century Inuit-Métis families and seasonal Newfoundland fishers occupied settlements that leave similar archaeological surface-traces. In 2009 a SSHRC-funded Community-University Research Alliance was initiated to examine Inuit history in southern Labrador. One of the primary goals of the research was to develop archaeological criteria to distinguish between these ethnically distinct settlements. This paper presents the results from several seasons of research in Sandwich Bay, Labrador. It uses data from community interviews, archaeological surveys, and excavations at four Inuit settlements, one Inuit-Métis house, and one Newfoundland fishery camp to help resolve the issue of site ethnicity for the area immediately south of Hamilton Inlet. Site location and house and site features are used to increase confidence in Inuit site classification and to provide strategies for targeted test-excavations elsewhere in southern Labrador and on the Quebec North Shore. The results of the research also allow for a better understanding of the nature and extent of Inuit occupation in Sandwich Bay.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207