Quliaq tohongniaq tuunga (making histories): towards a critical inuvialuit archaeology in the Canadian western arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Inuvialuit of the Western Canadian Arctic have been both underrepresented and misrepresented in the annals of written history. The present study has sought to redress this gap both theoretically and methodologically through the process of undertaking a community-based archaeology project with the Inuvialuit. This study was formulated within a critical perspective, with a view to developing a localized critical theory suited to Inuvialuit worldviews and social needs. Methodologically, the project aimed to enfranchise Inuvialuit into the process of (re)telling their histories through the identification and (re)interpretation of Inuvialuit material culture. Inuvialuit Elders superseded this task by situating their traditional objects in a rich tapestry of personal stories, experiences, and remembrances. They demonstrated how Inuvialuit approaches to the past are fundamentally different from western perspectives of linear history. The study explores the convergences and divergences between how the Inuvialuit past is portrayed by insiders and outsiders, and also suggests how such representations are constructed within present cu ltural and sociopolitical circumstances . Inuvialuit Elders and community leaders asserted that their identities are constituted by their knowledge of a shared history and by their relationship to the land, and that these representations of the past are critical to understanding their present and to negotiating their future. The relationship developed over the course of this project between the Inuvialuit and archaeological communities has made strides towards both a critical Inuvialuit archaeology and towards the decolonizing of archaeological theory and practice in the Canadian north.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".