Anthropological Fieldwork among the Commercial Fishermen of Port Dover, Ontario, 1977-1978: Chronicling the Cultural Traditions of an Occupational Community in a Lake Erie Commercial Fishing Port
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les anthropologues ont longtemps compté sur les études sur le terrain à l'appui de leur recherche.Pour les étudiants de la discipline, le travail de terrain reste un rite de passage particulièrement important (mais pas une obligation) par lequel ils doivent passer avec succès afin de devenir praticien reconnu et accrédité de la discipline.Ce document sert à deux fins.Tout d'abord, il relate les défis rencontrés par l'auteur au cours de la période de son travail de terrain anthropologique (comme étudiant visant son doctorat) parmi les pêcheurs commerciaux à Port Dover, dans l'Ontario.En second lieu, il sert à mettre en évidence la nécessité, longtemps constatée, pour les anthropologues et autres spécialistes des sciences sociales à s'engager dans la recherche ethnographique sur le terrain des pêcheurs commerciaux des Grands Lacs.Ces pêcheurs vont partager leurs expériences dans l'environnement de ce travail qui les définit.Mais leurs histoires ne seront pas entendus tant que l'on ne parle pas d'eux. Port Dover's Commercial Fisheries: the Fieldwork Setting, 1960-1977Lake Erie's commercial fishing industry has had a rich, complex and colourful past.5 Along the Canadian north shore, the communities of Port Maitland, Port Dover, Port Burwell, Port Stanley, Erieau, Wheatley and Kingsville (among lesser known coastal tier villages) have supported thriving commercial fisheries through the years.6 Port 2
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".