Synergy of local ecological knowledge, community involvement and scientific study to develop marine wildlife areas in eastern Arctic Canada
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
The Canadian Arctic provides important habitat for millions of marine birds. Some key habitat sites for these have already been protected, but many others lack official protected status and remain vulnerable to various anthropogenic threats. The authors worked with the community of Qikiqtarjuaq, Nunavut, to create two new National Wildlife Areas that protect the colonies, and the nearby marine area, of approximately 500,000 birds during the breeding season. The process has taken two decades to complete, in part due to misunderstanding and mistrust of government on the part of aboriginal residents. In this paper the path that led to the creation of these sites is traced. This has included the approach adopted to collaborating with the local community, incorporating aboriginal (local) ecological knowledge, conducting scientific surveys while building local capacity for further scientific investigation, and finding a solution that addressed the disparate interests of the various stakeholders in this process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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