MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113806502 · doi:10.1080/02757206.2020.1862105

Creation and legacy of historic silences in anthropological traditions: An ethnohistorical re-analysis of nineteenth-century Coast Salish genealogy, leadership, and territoriality

2020· article· en· W3113806502 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick Morgan Ritchie, Rainer Hatoum

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory and Anthropology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAssembly of First Nations
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGenealogyIndigenousNarrativeTerritorialityInheritance (genetic algorithm)Identity (music)HistoryField (mathematics)Perspective (graphical)SociologyAnthropologyEthnologyAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We scrutinize previously untranslated field notebooks of Franz Boas that relate to the lower Fraser River region of coastal British Columbia, and contextualize the historical and social position of his principle interlocutor, siyá:m George StsEē’lis. In doing so, we reposition the available documentary evidence about this siyá:m for a different perspective on his people’s history than has been written. The central themes emerging from our study provide new insights into genealogy and inheritance, marriage alliances, and the nature of leadership during a socially tumultuous time. These insights in turn are the key to interpreting conflicting anthropological narratives that continue to undermine an indigenous communities’ assertions of identity, history, and territorial rights.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.024
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistory and AnthropologySame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207