MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569838693 · doi:10.7202/1037600ar

The Government of Canada and Intangible Cultural Heritage

2016· article· en· W2569838693 on OpenAlex
Gerald L. Pocius

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnologies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Cultural heritageCultural heritage managementContext (archaeology)Industrial heritageIntangible cultural heritageConventionPolitical sciencePublic administrationPublic relationsLawHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past twenty years, what constitutes a culture’s heritage has been debated amongst those responsible for governmental policies, as well as the constituents that governments serve. While heritage has often focused on tangible items – architecture and the material world – recent policies have broadened the focus to include the intangible: knowledge, ideas, performances, beliefs handed down for generations. Many national and international agencies – lead by UNESCO – now have policies and programs that deal with intangible cultural heritage (ICH). Within the Canadian context, the federal government has had differing interpretations of the importance of this type of heritage. Most recently, in spite of initial involvement in its drafting, the Department of Canadian Heritage has decided not to support UNESCO’s new international ICH Convention, which went into force in April, 2006, and now includes more than 160 countries that have ratified it. Historically, provincial governments and NGOs across Canada have been more involved with ICH, and it is here that the most recent initiatives are occurring. The changing stance of the Department of Canadian Heritage on this topic may well be related to specific figures involved, unspoken fears of legal repercussions, and the lobbying of special interest heritage groups.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.164 · 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