Охрана культурно-исторического наследия в провинции Альберта, Канада. Сообщение
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Present article is devoted to description of cultural resources management process in the province of Alberta, Canada. Active industrial development involves potential hazards to historical resources, therefore questions of cultural-historical heritage study and preservation have to be addressed. The article focuses on the legislative basis of the cultural resources management process and the practice of its enforcement on the example of a project of historical resources impact assessment performed for the forestry company. All questions related to historical resources including archaeological objects in the province are managed by Historical Resources Management branch of Alberta Culture ministry under the Historical Resources Act. This Act regulates aspects of historical resources identification, designation, study, and preservation. More detailed regulations of historical resources study are stated in the Archaeological and Paleontological Research Permit Regulations document. It outlines the requirements for the specialists performing the historical resources assessments and identifies the procedures of reporting the results of theses studies. Any development that poses risks for historical resources must undergo Historical Resources Overview and if deemed necessary the Historical Resources impact Assessment. The latter involves either Pre-Impact infield assessment preceding the development or PostImpact audit. The results of these studies both positive and negative are to be reported to Alberta Culture in order to obtain the clearance for the planned development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".