MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150741050 · doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2012.01.004

Traditional knowledge management and preservation: Intersections with Library and Information Science

2012· article· en· W2150741050 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Information & Library Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCustodiansTraditional knowledgeCultural knowledgeInformation scienceSociologyIntersection (aeronautics)Order (exchange)Knowledge organizationKnowledge managementLibrary sciencePublic relationsPolitical scienceBusinessComputer scienceHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The African proverb “When an elder dies, a library burns down” clearly sums up the importance of traditional knowledge preservation and cultural continuity, which the study found to be a key need and concern amongst First Nations communities in Ontario, Canada. To follow-up on elders’ suggestions that libraries are potential custodians of traditional knowledge, this paper explores how traditional knowledge preservation intersects with Library and Information Science (LIS) practices of knowledge classification, organization, and dissemination and establishes the various challenges that this intersection poses to these LIS practices. The paper concludes that libraries and other information institutions need to re-examine and reconstruct themselves in ways that take into account non-western epistemologies and worldviews and develop much needed cultural competency in order to undertake traditional knowledge custodianship.

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 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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.041
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.177 · 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