MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127937951 · doi:10.22230/jem.2001v1n1a216

Water: A First Nations' Spiritual and Ecological Perspective.

2001· article· en· W2127937951 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael D. Blackstock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecosystems and Management · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Natural History
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaKamloops Art Gallery
FundersSmithsonian Institution
KeywordsScope (computer science)EthnographyPerspective (graphical)Environmental ethicsEcosystemEcologySociologyGeographyAnthropologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water quality and availability is an urgent global concern. This paper documents, through the use of ethnographic research methods, First Nations� concerns and perspectives about water. The paper�s scope is primarily limited to the views of three Elders from the southern Interior of British Columbia: Mary Thomas from the Secwepemc, Millie Michell from the Nlaka�pamux, and Mary Louie from the Syilx Nation. Secondary literature sources complement the Elders� sharing of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). The Elders� emphasis on the spiritual impor-tance of water is contrasted with Western science�s emphasis on water�s unique physical and chemical properties. This fundamental difference raises questions about Western science�s approach to freshwater ecosystem management and study. Ultimately, this paper documents the wisdom of highly respected Elders about water in relation to the culture and freshwater ecosystems of South-Central British Columbia.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations63
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ecosystems and ManagementSame topicArchaeology and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207