MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7025494871

Vestiges of a Previous Industrial Age: A Contemporary Archaeology of Twentieth Century Single Industrial Mining Regions in the Far North

2023· dissertation· en· W7025494871 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman settlementResource (disambiguation)PoliticsInvestment (military)Industrial archaeologyGovernment (linguistics)Settlement (finance)Exploitation of natural resourcesPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis aims to develop archaeological understandings of mining communities and sites in three (sub-)Arctic regions in Norway (Sør-Varanger), Canada (western Labrador), and Russia (Kola Peninsula), all of which underwent rapid industrial colonisation during the twentieth century. Today the regions continue as resource peripheries despite economic, social, and political changes that made the construction of single industrial settlements no longer tenable. As such, these regions are “vestiges” of a previous industrial age – objects of the past that make up and influence the present that also contain potentials to be remobilized and serve new purposes. \n The thesis addresses four basic questions: \n \n Q1: To what extent did material legacies emerging from a period of significant government interest and investment in the regions survive into the present and how do they continue to persist in a time where investment into social services has declined and industrial labour has become more flexible? \n Q2: What tensions arise when things from this prosperous past find new purposes in the present or remain recalcitrantly redundant? \n Q3: What does the urge to give things from the past “usefulness” tell us about the temporal and geographical boundaries of the resource extraction industry in the (sub-)Arctic? \n Q4: How does one do an archaeology of non-abandoned sites? \n \n The thesis addresses these questions from a new materialist perspective and a multi-sited methodological approach that combined fieldwalking, photographic documentation, archival research, and select interviews. Through articles and the discussions in this introductory text, it advances knowledge in three areas that have been called “Pasts in the Present”, “The Working Fine and the Broken”, and “An Archaeology of Non-Abandonment” to develop understandings of how one can archaeologically engage with ongoing industrial regions in the present. Specifically, it highlights how everyone is physically and materially entangled in the past, how heritage discourses should move away from dichotomies between things that are working fine and things that are broken, and how archaeology and heritage should abandon the notion of “abandonment” as a useful heuristic concept to make room for alternative understandings of how the present grows out from the foundations of the past.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo)Same topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207