MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111584723 · doi:10.7202/1073791ar

Archéologues et Autochtones : quelle réconciliation possible quand l’éthique et la perspective des uns et des autres divergent?

2020· article· fr· W3111584723 on OpenAlex
Christian Gates St-Pierre

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Bioethics · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesConciliationPhilosophyLawArbitration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La décolonisation de la science et la réconciliation avec les communautés autochtones mènent les archéologues vers de nouvelles pratiques archéologiques plus collaboratives et respectueuses des enjeux, des considérations et des perspectives autochtones concernées. Malgré les conséquences généralement positives émanant de ce type de projet, des tensions peuvent surgir entre les différentes parties prenantes lorsque leurs besoins et objectifs ne concordent pas. L’étude de cas fictive présentée ici illustre la complexité de telles situations et les dilemmes éthiques qui peuvent en découler.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.200 · 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