MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466740937 · doi:10.15173/nexus.v22i1.21

Hybridization at the Neutral Iroquoian Walker Site (AgHa-9)

2014· article· en· W2466740937 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Melissa Marie Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueNEXUS The Canadian Student Journal of Anthropology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousEthnologyAgency (philosophy)AcculturationSettlement (finance)HistoryArchaeologyGenealogySociologyImmigrationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is written with the intention of exploring the types of approaches used to study Indigenous and European contact, using the Iroquoian Neutral culture as an example. The Neutral, a northern Iroquoian group, were similar overall culturally to other Northern Iroquoian groups in Ontario. Their settlement in the first half of the 17th century is believed to have been focused in what is now Southern Ontario, from the north of Lake Erie, to the west of LakeOntario (Noble 1984:4). Based on their placement in southern Ontario between other Indigenous groups, they were in an excellent position for trade. In an attempt to understand the ways in which Indigenous people incorporated European material culture, a new concept, hybridization, is proposed. Hybridization, like syncretism, is the incorporation of European materials into Indigenous society by creating what would be considered ‘traditional’ forms of artifacts. By utilizing this kind of analysis, it is possible to incorporate Indigenous agency, without using out-dated methods that assume acculturation as the ultimate end to culture contact.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEXUS The Canadian Student Journal of AnthropologySame topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207