MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893623529 · doi:10.5380/his.v66i1.57403

ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRACTICE IN QUÉBEC CITY, A UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE CITY

2018· article· pt· W2893623529 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William J. Moss

Bibliographic record

VenueHistória Questões & Debates · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyArchaeologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A arqueologia é conhecida como ferramenta de desenvolvimento econômico assim como meio de engajamento social. O nível municipal está sendo, cada vez mais, visto como o meio privilegiado para a proteção do patrimônio cultural arqueológico e a participação cidadã. Enquanto sitio do patrimônio mundial da UNESCO, a cidade de Quebec desenvolveu uma abordagem conectando governança e participação publica, assim como legislação e prática. O programa arqueológico da cidade de Quebec conta entre os mais antigos no Canadá e ilustra as evoluções na governança e na prática arqueológicas desde os últimos cinquenta anos. Os arqueólogos da cidade de Quebec trabalham atualmente em preparar um plano diretor arqueológico no contexto da atualização da legislação do patrimônio na província canadense de Quebec. Este plano será acompanhado por politicas e programas pensados para favorecer o interesse público bem como promover a participação da população nesse processo de gestão e valorização desse patrimônio.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0190.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistória Questões & DebatesSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207