MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168848583 · doi:10.7202/013194ar

Routes, trails and tracks: Trail breaking among the Inuit of Igloolik

2006· article· en· W2168848583 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Claudio Aporta

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsGeographyArcticCommercial fishingFishingThe arcticPerceptionFisheryEcologyPsychologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant social, economic, and technological changes, travelling remains a significant part of people's lives in the community of Igloolik, in the territory of Nunavut, Canada. When the snow covers the land and the sea ice, travellers start breaking trails, some of which recreate routes that have been used by generations of Inuit. These routes belong to the individual and social memory of the community, and this knowledge affords people safe and reliable travel to hunting and fishing grounds and between communities. This paper analyzes the characteristics of routes traditionally used by the people of Igloolik and explores the differences between land routes and sea-ice routes, the role of the trail breaker , and the characteristics of oral descriptions of routes. Finally, it addresses the issue of how the perception of trails is changing due to generational differences and the use of new transportation technologies. The study of trails and routes reveals some significant features of the Inuit understanding of the Arctic environment, provides an indication of the history of land and sea use in the area, and shows how verbal descriptions of the territory in particular and oral knowledge in general may remain unchanged or with little variation through time.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations100
Published2006
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207