MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989951217 · doi:10.1093/ijtj/ijz027

Archives, Museums and Sacred Storage: Dealing with the Afterlife of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada

2019· article· en· W2989951217 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Transitional Justice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionAfterlifeIndigenousCollective memoryFeelingSociologyVisual artsAestheticsLawPolitical scienceArtPsychologyLiteratureSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract∞ The Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) acquired over 1,200 material submissions through the gifts it received at its events. Though other TRCs mention objects in their records, the gift-giving practice that became central to TRC events in Canada was unprecedented, and so is its large collection of TRC-gifted objects today. The Canadian TRC is thus unique and faces the challenges of categorizing, preserving, displaying and honouring these material artefacts. What has been the post-TRC life of these objects and art pieces? What is their role in creating a collective memory of residential schools and how might they promote reconciliation? This article shows that the post-TRC life of the objects opens up new museological spaces and practices through the ways the objects are curated (or not) for remembering and learning about residential schools according to Indigenous protocols and ways of thinking and feeling.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.168 · 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