MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390750415 · doi:10.4324/9781003358787-23

Repatriation of Chief Crowfoot's Regalia to the Siksika Nation – a conservator's involvement *

2024· book-chapter· en· W4390750415 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Morwena Stephens

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepatriationManagementPsychoanalysisPsychologyPolitical scienceLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chief Crowfoot’s regalia was repatriated to the Siksika Nation, Blackfoot Confederacy, from the Royal Albert Memorial Museum (RAMM), Exeter. The process began as part of the Blackfoot Collections in UK Museums Network, with a 2013 Blackfoot delegation visit leading to the 2022 repatriation of Isapo-muxika’s (Chief Crowfoot’s) regalia. The collection obtained by Cecil Denny, an officer in Canada’s North West Mounted Police, at the 1877 signing of Treaty 7, was acquired by RAMM from Denny’s sister in 1904. The conservator’s role was to support the Blackfoot delegation visit (2013) and prepare the collection for repatriation. It comprises Isapo-muxika’s shirt, leggings, knife, necklace, sacred bundles, bow, bow case, quiver, horsewhips, and pouches. This involved making the regalia accessible within the store, engaging with the Blackfoot visitors, preparing the collection for the repatriation visit and transport to the Siksika Nation, and conservation documentation. Through consultation with colleagues and Siksika Elders, the needs of the regalia were established, regarding which objects should be packed together, taboos about handling the sacred material, and how each piece should be wrapped in cloth rather than tissue.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207