Marking place and creating space in northern Algonquian landscapes: The rock -art of the Lake of the Woods region, Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research presented here addresses issues in the socio-cultural production of pictographic rock-art in the Lake of the Woods region of northwestern Ontario, Canada. The majority of previous research has worked to define pictographic rock-art, images painted on cliff faces and other rock outcrops, in the context of historically and ethnographically documented religious and cosmological belief systems of northern Algonquian Indians. Drawing from a diverse body of theoretical perspectives including landscape archaeology, information theory, and hunter-gatherer mobility and land tenure research, this study takes the perspective that pictographic rock-art had functions in addition to those previously suggested for the region. Some of the possible functions examined include territorial marking, trail marking, resource marking, marking of socially defined roles, identification of places of aggregation on the landscape, structuring of social interactions, and the marking of social identity at various levels within the society. Given this number of potential functions, four site types were proposed that communicated information regarding one or more of these functions: General Multiple Function, General Single Function, Specialized Multiple Function and Specialized Single Function. The site types were defined using a combination of the Shannon information measure and ethnographically defined image categories found among historic Algonquian groups. When mapped onto the study region, the distributions of these sites indicated patterning suggestive of several of the proposed functions. In particular, it provided support for the hypothesis that pictographic rock-art sites served to structure the social landscape by facilitating population movements across the landscape and to indicate and define forms of social interactions related to land tenure and social exchange. Of note is the observation that within the sample no pictographic sites were identified that served exclusively secular functions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".