Taking on Looting: Pursuing Sustainable Site Protection Policies in Southern Ontario
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Centuries of looting has repeatedly unearthed the archaeological remains of First Nations middens, villages, and cemeteries. This paper presents a case for new measures to curtail these illicit practices in Ontario. Over the last decade, many archaeologists have espoused a program of sustainable archaeology. I suggest protections of in situ contexts against looting will further the objectives of sustainable archaeology and contribute to this broader trajectory of practice in the province. Using the history of looting and archaeological conditions at Neutral Iroquoian (Attawandaron) sites, along with information from modern collectors, the paper reveals the persistent threat of looting and the necessity for action. I suggest the province, municipalities, and archaeological stakeholders deploy policies aimed at preserving these resources into the future. I advocate for a stewardship of personal and collective responsibility among property owners and hobbyists through educational initiatives, legal easement agreements, and existing legislative mandates to serve as a pragmatic step towards the long-term sustainable protection of these sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it