Коренные малочисленные народы в зеркале отечественных и зарубежных сайтов: концептуальные подходы к разработке средств оптимизации контента
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of the comparative analysis of domestic and foreign sites of indigenous peoples are provided. The research was conducted at the Institute of Information Technologies in Social Sphere of Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts. We analyzed 60 sites and portals of Indigenous Peoples, including 30 domestic and 30 out of the country. As a part of the 30 foreign sites, we analyzed the sites ot the United States, Canada, and Australia. The structure includes 30 domestic sites of the Internet resources owned by interregional and regional associations and indigenous peoples' communities living in Russia. The research compared subjected to thematic classifications, which help structuring the sites' content. It revealed the substantial differences between the content of foreign and domestic sites and portals dedicated to indigenous peoples. The research found that the main difference content of domestic and foreign sites can be displayed using two generalizing concepts: About Us and For Us. The concept About Us means the totality of information, providing the narrative description of an ethnic group (people's history, spiritual culture and traditional beliefs, traditional occupations, traditional settlements and dwellings, customs and rituals, folk art, etc.). The concept About Us does not imply further action of a person based on this information. As a rule, this concept does not include a consideration of the vital problems of life and activity of indigenous peoples and involvement in their solution of the general public. Such a static way of presenting the information is typical for domestic sites. The concept For Us is a collection of information, providing the situational characteristic of an eth-nos and its modern life reflection. It involves a variety of people's actions based on the information to solve their urgent problems. E.g., a possibility of using the site to consult on employment in finding a job, enroll in courses of the native language, etc. This concept is based on meeting the needs of a wide variety of categories of users of the site: senior citizens, children, youth, mothers, etc. Such dynamic way of presenting the information is typical for foreign sites. The disadvantages of both, domestic and foreign sites, is the lack of a harmonious combination of concepts About Us and For Us. The negative consequence of this is the lack of complete and integral characteristics of indigenous people, retrospective (trough history), and at the present level as a system on the sites. We offer a special linguistic tool designed to eliminate fragmentation and incompleteness of a content of indigenous peoples' sites. This problem categories' classification allows clearly structured ethnographic information as a part of Internet resources. It is intended to provide a system to provide information to overcome subjectivism in developing the content of indigenous peoples' sites. Problem categories' classification also allows you to identify gaps in the composition of indigenous peoples sites' content, to make informed decisions for their optimization. Its main objective is improving the quality and reliability of sites' content. It aims to eliminate the incompleteness and fragmentation of information contained in Internet resources of different owners: the state authorities, museums, libraries, universities, communities, tribes, associations of indigenous peoples and others. The problem categories' classification may be useful for federal and regional authorities, who are engaged in management activities and streamline the development of Internet resources, reflecting the interests of indigenous peoples. The results can be used both: to make informed design decisions in the development of sites and portals' content, as well as for training and professional development of information personnel.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".