Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variations in the national format of archaeological employment become most evident at the level of central government. In federal systems such as those of the US, Australia, and Canada, organizations such as these nations' respective national park services (the National Park Service [NPS], Parks Australia, and Parks Canada) are part of a distinct system with many responsibilities, a clear legal remit, central and regional hierarchy, and a large budget. In comparison, centralized but not federalized nations such as the UK have broadly comparable organizations to the NPS, but the responsibilities, legal remit, organizational structure, and budgets involved are much less clear. The situation in the UK is further complicated by the decentralization of government there, particularly the varying responsibilities of the Regional Assemblies of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Notwithstanding the above, central governments around the world employ archaeologists alongside allied heritage professionals, and employment in these organizations can be an extremely rewarding career path for those who choose to pursue it, offering a unique vantage point at the intersection of commercial, academic, and local government archaeology (Figure 25).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".