Ejigabwîn: A silvicultura na encruzilhada em Kitcisakik
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A floresta se encontra no coração da paisagem cultural dos Anichinabés de Kitcisakik, no Canadá. Da mesma forma que para numerosas nações autóctones deste país, o território ancestral desta comunidade algonquina da Província do Quebec tem sido objeto de contínuas intervenções florestais desde o final do século xix. Para enfrentar esta problemática, o povo de Kitcisakik escolheu se envolver em um processo de pesquisa colaborativa, apoiado por um quadro de referência em educação ambiental. Esta iniciativa permitiu iniciar um diálogo intercultural tendo como objetivo definir os fundamentos de uma silvicultura mais bem adaptada ao contexto indígena. A pesquisa revelou o caráter identitário da floresta (nopimik) para os Anichinabés e a dimensão preocupante da silvicultura. A partir do sistema de representação anichinabé, elaboramos um quadro de cinco princípios (cultural, ético, educativo, ecológico e econômico) e de 22 critérios de silvicultura indígena. Esta proposta é analisada no contexto das mudanças normativas e legislativas implementadas no Quebec pela nova Lei sobre o ordenamento sustentável do território florestal e o reforço dos critérios de certificação florestal do Forest Stewardship Council (FSC).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".