MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071291599 · doi:10.14430/arctic4242

Weathering Changes: Cultivating Local and Traditional Knowledge of Environmental Change in Tr'ondëk Hwëchin Traditional Territory

2012· article· en· W2071291599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shirley Roburn

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateGovernment (linguistics)MainstreamContext (archaeology)Cultural heritagePolitical scienceWork (physics)Public relationsCorporate governanceTraditional knowledgeSociologyPublic administrationManagementEngineeringGeographyArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores a particular experience of cultural bridging between the Heritage Department of the Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in (TH) First Nation and academics and government funders taking part in the 2007–09 International Polar Year. The TH Heritage Department acted as lead researcher on the project entitled Documenting Traditional Knowledge in Relation to Climate Change. TH Heritage staff spearheaded and largely carried out the project work. Academic researchers, acting as contractors, collaborated in some project activities and produced academic papers summarizing the work. This collaboration provided a rare opportunity for the TH Heritage Department to share the research it has conducted for more than a decade in the broader, institutional context of university and government research. Its success highlights the fact that relationships between these partners are evolving and becoming more equitable: First Nations research is receiving more support, and the corpus of mainstream knowledge is changing, allowing different bodies of work to “count” as knowledge. This paper analyzes some of the differences between TH Heritage approaches to its mandate for gathering and sharing Traditional Knowledge (TK) and the understandings and uses of TK by other governments and by university-based academics. On the basis of project results and recent policy developments in northern governance and research, it makes practical recommendations for reconciling knowledge approaches and building mutually supportive research relationships between First Nations, academics, and government.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207