MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W182377814

Ethnonyms and Images : Genesis of the `Inuit' and Image Manipulation

2002· article· en· W182377814 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Henry Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueSenri ethnological studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsInnocenceIgnoranceCivilizationEthnic groupState (computer science)Everyday lifeColonialismHistoryEthnologySociologyAestheticsAnthropologyPolitical scienceLawArtArchaeologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The image that the Western world drew for hunting and gathering societies is a double, but converging image. There are negative aspects such as brutality, ignorance, primitivness, childishness, uncivilised; and affirmative aspects of purity, innocence, of being one with nature. Either is set up as a foil to civilisation, and has been an integral part of the colonial stratagem to restrain and govern in every aspect of the life of the hunter and gathering societies. However, in recent years, hunting and gathering societies are re-forming or creating self-images suited to betterment of their socio-political situations, or more fitting to their newly acquired status within the nation-state. Such images, as well as being used in political negociation, also are being mobilised as ethnic markers. The A. first discusses how hunting activities, once an important but everyday act, have been mobilised as an image and ethnic marker in the transition from Eskimo to Inuit in Canada. Then he takes up some problems, such as the politics of imagery, the autonomic and heteronomic aspects of imagery, and the importance of imagery in the hunter-gatherer political arena today.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.052
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSenri ethnological studiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207