MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210283088 · doi:10.51270/45.2.330

Indigenous Human Remains Database from Archaeological Sites in Québec: Preliminary Results

2021· article· en· W4210283088 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jesseca Paquette, Isabelle Ribot, Christian Gates St-Pierre, Christine Zachary-Deom, Gaetan Nolet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Archaeology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousRepatriationArchaeologyGeographyMohawkDatabaseHistoryLibrary scienceComputer scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the preliminary results of a project initiated by the Mohawk Council of Kahnawa:ke and the Groupe de recherche ArchéoSociale/ArchéoScience (Université de Montréal) to create a database of archaeological sites in Quebec that included Indigenous human remains. This document will be a useful tool for the repatriation/rematriation process. Using existing inventories, the database collated various data points for each site, such as the Borden code, location, date, minimal number of individuals (MNI), location of remains, reports, etc. Three site categories were identified: 1) those describing the discovery of human remains associated with Indigenous people (103 sites); 2) those with­out skeletal remains despite mentioning the presence of burial(s) (8 sites); and 3) those not reporting any information (81 sites). From these sites, information on more than 678 individuals have been collected so far. Site mapping has allowed the visualization of site distribution spatially and through time. Further research is needed to clarify the cultural affiliation and the storage location of these human remains.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ArchaeologySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207