Nartj Katitj Bidi Ngulluckiny Koorl? (Which Knowledge Path Will We Travel?)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite our long history and our constant presence, 'Nyungar' experiences and achievements are underrepresented in the historiography of the South West. Various writers have critiqued the minimal recognition of 'Nyungar', 'Murri' and 'Koori' ideology and theories within social science. Calls from Indigenous Australians for historical works reflecting their experiences and concerns are mirrored globally in countries such as New Zealand, South Africa, the United States and Canada. For example, Mason Durie wrote of the Maori reclaiming their histories through their writing. In this article, we touch on some of the significant differences in history as it is told or written by 'Nyungar' and as it is told or written by 'wedjela' (a 'Nyungar' rendition of the term 'white fellow'). In thinking about doing research, and asking others to think more deeply about their research and writing, we also point to ways in which 'wedjela' history might reflect more 'Nyungar' experiences and concerns.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.020 |
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".