<i>Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit</i>: Social History, Politics and the Practice of Resistance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The creation of the Nunavut government has been accompanied by an emphasis on Inuit knowledge—Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ)—in the making of policy and in procedures affecting Nunavutmiut (Nunavummiut). Definitions of IQ parallel those of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), indigenous knowledge (IK), and traditional knowledge (TK). The extent to which cosmologies and belief systems are incorporated into definitions of these terms and the extent to which their use is narrowly focused on the management of biological resources are ongoing sources of concern. The language used to define and promote IQ often serves to move IQ away from its cosmological implications and define it as a tool useful for filling gaps in scientific knowledge. To appreciate a seamless definition of IQ, a better understanding of Inuit social and cultural history is necessary. An examination of this history depicts IQ as a form of resistant practice that can seriously challenge characteristic assumptions of Western science, such as the separation of humans from other forms of life. Inuit operating with a seamless definition of IQ are, however, confronted with contemporary social, economic, and political realities that challenge and may limit the use of IQ in the management and development of Nunavut.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it