Indigenous interventions at Klahowya Village, χwayχw əyVancouver/ unceded Coast Salish Territory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
n a hot day in late July 2010, I walked through an area of Stanley Park, downtown Vancouver's thousand-acre urban park, with some participants from a youth exchange programme I was hosting between East Vancouver and Fort Good Hope, Northwest Territories. 1 On our way to a picnic lunch at the beach, we stopped so that the northern youth could take the chance to look at some of the park's huge west-coast trees.Just beyond the aquarium, a sign advertising Klahowya Village caught our attention and, close behind it, the false wall of a longhouse, built with cedar planks adorned with two large cut-outs of red hands upraised in a gesture of thanks and welcome (the logo of the Aboriginal Tourism Association of British Columbia).Coast Salish iconography decorated the entrance.Although I had heard of the recently opened tourist attraction, a visit to the site had not been planned.However, since our visitors were interested, we walked through, lingering beside a carver working on a tree stump.He spoke to some of the group and, on learning they were participating in a youth exchange, decided to perform a ceremony with us.Getting us to join hands in a circle around the stump he was working on, he asked us to help him connect with the spirit of the wood.A costumed singer danced and drummed as we circled and sang along.As the music ended, he asked us all to lay our hands on the wood.We then packed up and went on our way.I was left feeling ambivalent, not having understood what I had just experienced.I am wary of much of the cultural tourism that happens in Vancouver's public spaces and suspicious of the commodification of indigeneity.We had not been asked to pay any money for our experience but artisan-made cedar bark hats, dreamcatchers and bentwood boxes were on sale as well as tickets to the 'Spirit Catcher' train ride.I did not know where the performers and artists at the village had come from or who was paying them to be there, yet our interactions with them were positive.I felt uncomfortable and wanted to know why.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".