A dialogue and reflection on photohistory: Engaging indigenous communities in research through visual analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attempts at capturing observations and concerns of change in the Canadian north (sub-Arctic, Arctic) have been mostly conducted through interviews and focus groups spearheaded by researchers. Indeed, images depicting change in the north, when utilized at all, are mostly used to confirm and illustrate the findings derived from researchers. Rarely are local depictions of change used in these interpretations. The purpose of this Notes from the field is to discuss the application of a methodology we term ‘photohistory’ in a study examining visual depictions of cultural and environmental changes in the Moose Cree and MoCreebec First Nations in northern Ontario, Canada. This process of active engagement fosters past reclamation of old photographs while encouraging the discovery of new research directions and partnerships. The application of photohistory in a First Nations located in northern Canada, and subsequent refinement of the methodology for future studies, are discussed.
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.
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 | 0.038 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it