Heritage NL Craft at Risk List 2021
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) is known for its traditions, heritage skills, arts, and crafts. Concerned about the loss of traditional know-how, Heritage NL is working to document crafts at risk and to develop ways to encourage knowledge mobilization and the sharing of heritage skills. In 2019, the Heritage Craft at Risk Survey identified which crafts are most at risk of disappearing. Through the survey, organizers asked craft producers, makers, and builders to provide feedback on the current state of the heritage craft they were most familiar with. The survey covered topics such as the number of makers currently practising specific skills, and issues limiting the health of crafts.The Craft at Risk List is a joint project of Heritage NL and Craft Council of Newfoundland and Labrador, that developed as a result of this survey. It ranks heritage crafts from currently viable to extinct and provides recommendations for the industry. One of these recommendations that Heritage NL is currently piloting is a Mentor-Apprentice program that allows deep learning of endangered skills for economic development. This poster will present an overview of the research that went into the Craft at Risk List 2021, and discuss why the Mentor-Apprentice Program was developed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 it