Beyond the harsh. Objective and subjective living conditions in Nunavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper simultaneously analyses some objective and subjective living conditions in Nunavut (federal territory of Canada located in the Arctic) in 2001: population, housing, language, education, economic activities, health, social problems and geographic mobility. It examines original descriptive statistics from the Survey of living conditions in the Arctic and other sources. In some cases the results confirm the ordinary depressing picture of Inuit conditions, but in other cases statistics qualify or even contradict such a picture. The overall findings show that despite objective difficult conditions, Nunavummiut living in Nunavut (primarily the elites and the lower class) are generally satisfied with their communities so that the majority wishes to remain there. Certain modern social institutions and individual rationalities are contributing to this situation: wage earning, market economy, utilitarian and consumption oriented approach, democratic state based on law, formal knowledge, individualism and the capacity for self analysis. The concepts of aspiration and mastery of one's own destiny seem accurate to explain the importance of education and employment in people's satisfaction, and their dissatisfaction about the housing situation. The existence of family and neighbourhood networks appears to explain both a certain residential stability and out migration, through the social support functions of these networks, in which sharing and exchanging food play a major role. In general, if most of Nunavummiut continue to live in the Arctic despite unfavourable conditions, it is not only because they are able to ensure their material existence there, but also because they attach a meaning to and believe that that is where they have the best chance to exert the highest degree of control over their personal and domestic reality.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".