MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316143856 · doi:10.30816/iconn5/2019/40

Toponyms of the Cree Amerindians and geological resources in Quebec, Canada

2022· article· en· W4316143856 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Onomastics "Name and Naming" · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToponymyGeolocationContext (archaeology)GeographyField (mathematics)HistoryComputer scienceCartographyArchaeologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among nomadic peoples, the designation of a geographical location is a way of locating itself directly in the visual field of the group concerned, unlike the GPS (satellite geolocation system) whose information is decrypted and retransmitted through artifacts. In the context of nomadism, if toponymy is a localization system with regard to moving from one place to another and common to a given group, its retranscription may differ according to the needs of such a society. This is the case with the toponymy of the Cree Amerindians and geological resources in Quebec. In this paper, the procedure for validating mineralogical indices from toponyms will take into account the fact that these names were created from the observation made by the Cree Native American nation: color, shine, texture. Why could toponyms be indicators of mineral resources and possibly of minerals as well?

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.225 · 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