MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754108086 · doi:10.29173/fa3

Four Views on Archival Decolonization Inspired by the TRC's Calls to Action

2017· article· en· W2754108086 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Greg Bak, Tolly Bradford, Jessie Loyer, Elizabeth Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueFonds d Archives · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedressDecolonizationAction (physics)CommissionPresentation (obstetrics)Political scienceMedia studiesSociologyLawPoliticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada issued 94 Calls to Action to“redress the legacy of residential schools and advance the process of Canadian reconciliation.” Four of these Calls to Action were directly addressed to Canadian museums and archives, with several other Calls potentially affecting archival practice. In this article, originally presented as a panel presentation at the 2016 Archives Society of Alberta conference held in Canmore, Alberta, four perspectives on archival decolonization as related to the Calls to Action are offered.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0500.160
Scholarly communication0.0410.014
Open science0.0060.018
Research integrity0.0230.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.175 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFonds d ArchivesSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207