MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413397913 · doi:10.1080/00253359.2025.2527481

The Franklin Expedition Relics and Remains Found at Qavdlunaarsiorfik, Adelaide Peninsula, 1923 and 1924

2025· article· en· W4413397913 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janice Cavell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Mariner s Mirror · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian Indigenous Culture and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeninsulaGeographyArchaeologyPhysical geographyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the many material traces of Sir John Franklin’s disastrous 1845 Arctic expedition is a skull found on the Adelaide Peninsula in the early twentieth century by a fur trader, Peter Norberg. A short 1928 article, which identifies the skull as being that of a young European male, is almost the only published source on Norberg’s discovery. Archival documents reveal more about the date and other circumstances of the find. They also raise questions about exactly where Norberg picked up the skull. The 1928 article names Thunder Cove, but Norberg’s own brief, unpublished account states that it was at a spot he had visited in 1923 with the Danish explorer Knud Rasmussen. Local Inuit called this place Qavdlunaarsiorfik. Rasmussen’s diary and publications do not give the precise location of Qavdlunaarsiorfik, but it was certainly not Thunder Cove. Some Arctic historians believe that it was near Starvation Cove, one of the most famous Franklin sites. The evidence considered in this article strongly suggests that Qavdlunaarsiorfik was in Barrow Inlet, an area where no other significant searches have ever been made.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Mariner s MirrorSame topicAustralian Indigenous Culture and HistoryFrench-language works237,207