History of Yukon first nations art
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p></p><table><tbody><tr><td>\n</td>\n<td>The thesis argues that contrary to the present opinion in the Yukon \nthat there was little or no early Yukon First Nations art, there was in \nfact an established First Nations artistic tradition in the Yukon before\n the coming of the white man and also into the early contact years. It \nis also the general belief of the people of the Yukon that the \ntraditional art is the Northwest Coast Indian art even though there are \nvery few examples of that art style seen before the mid-1980s. The \nthesis presents a case that the adoption of the Northwest Coast Indian \nart style is a recent development and has no roots in the early Yukon.\n\n\n\nFurthermore, the thesis describes what the problems are and how the \nearly Yukon First Nations art almost vanished from the present day Yukon\n visual culture, what the early art looked like and how it was used. The\n thesis ends with a description of the situation in the present day \nYukon. Because of the lack of historical resources this thesis now \nbecomes the foundation for further research into the history of Yukon \nFirst </td></tr></tbody></table>
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".