Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents Nametoo, a collection of photographic artworks that I completed with my family in a place called Gawaabaasheeung. Nametoo confronts the erasure of Anishinabeg from their territorial lands located outside the Indian Act by inscribing our presence on these lands now occupied predominantly by settler Canadians. By drawing on my Anishinabekwe understanding of art, aesthetic, and ways of knowing and situating my work in a history of Indigenous photography, I bring photography out of a Eurocentric paradigm that employs a realist approach to embrace the relational and evocative aspects of photography. I contribute a decolonial aesthetic that is process based and emerges out of relationships with self, others, materials/tools, and the lands in which we are situated. It is a strategic aesthetic that both contributes to my family’s decolonial journey through strengthening intergenerational ties, reclaiming history, and regenerating a sense of belonging and identity, and provides a powerful counter-narrative to disrupt colonial histories while engaging viewers in critical reflection of their role in our continued displacement and abuse of our lands. Nametoo articulates visual sovereignty by visualizing our stories and their connection to the land. This work offers useful insight to Indigenous Peoples struggling to reassert their sovereignty within contested territories.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".