MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102574279 · doi:10.1177/1367877904047860

Nunavut

2004· article· en· W2102574279 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Avi Santo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cultural Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeIndigenousCitizenshipPoliticsSociologyIdentity (music)Television seriesMedia studiesCultural identityGender studiesAestheticsPolitical scienceArtSocial scienceLiteratureLawNegotiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article expands the discussion of Inuit broadcasting in northern Canada to encompass actual texts, about which little has been written. Specifically, I focus on Nunavut, a 13-part television series produced in 1994-5 by Igloolik Isuma Productions. Nunavut is considered the first dramatic series to be created entirely by Inuit. While drawing upon Ginsburg’s emphasis on the significance of ‘embedded aesthetics’ to indigenous media producers, I argue that Nunavut’s visual and narrative forms are essential to its cultural and political goals of sustaining and reviving Inuit culture, and, therefore, that any exploration of the series must not separate form from intention. I also build on John Hartley’s arguments for conceptualizing television as a teacher of cultural citizenship. Inuit media productions not only teach Inuit about their culture, but how to practice it. In this sense, Inuit media has been a significant source in mobilizing cultural citizenship. Nunavut’s aesthetic and narrative choices, which attempt to link past and present Inuit identity and forge a political future that encompasses indigenous identity, exemplify TV’s ‘love of influence’ (Hartley, 1999: 43).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicMedia, Communication, and EducationFrench-language works237,207