Creating Meaningful, Relevant, and Culturally Appropriate Digital Artifact Reproductions at the Intersections of Canadian Archaeology and Indigenous Heritage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation examines how diverse archaeological constituents engage with and evaluate original archaeological objects and their digital copies, including 3D models and 3D prints. While many existing studies in the archaeological and museum sectors consider digital outputs intrinsically beneficial for engagement, research, and decolonization, this research builds upon a body of literature calling for more culturally diverse critical reflection on digital archaeological practices. I use several archaeological ethnographic methods, including focus groups and semi-structured interviews, to discuss diverse impressions of archaeological objects and their digitized representations. I have documented these perspectives in two Canadian cases with different archaeological, historical, and socio-political contexts. The first case study deals with archaeological objects recovered from Banks Island, NWT, held at the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre (PWNHC) in Yellowknife. The second case concerns archaeological objects from across Southern Ontario, held at the Sustainable Archaeology facility (now an extension of the Museum of Ontario Archaeology) in London, Ontario. This research is intended to inform the artifact management and information-sharing strategies in the study areas so that meaningful connections can be made between people and archaeological or ancestral material. It also serves to inform broader discussions of meaning-making and knowledge-sharing in digital archaeological heritage practice. In addition, these discussions and reflections may help guide changes in digital curation practice and collections management in other locales by illuminating potential areas of concern to reflect upon and address with different local communities. Ultimately, this reflection aims to support the development or redevelopment of archaeological infrastructures that are ethical, culturally respectful, and socially conscious.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".