MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284688628

Meaningful Engagement: Women, Diverse Identities and Indigenous Water and Wastewater Responsibilities

2013· article· en· W2284688628 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jo-Anne Muise Lawless, Dorothy Taylor, Rachael Marshall, Emily Nickerson, Kim Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian women's studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les auteurs de cet article sont un collectif compose de membres des Premieres Nations, des metis, ils habitent la ville ou sur les reserves, ils sont jeunes, il y a des meres, des grands-meres, ils sont les gardiens du savoir autochtone, des historiens, des etudiants ingenieurs et d’autres en sciences sociales Nous avons travaille ensemble sur “Naanaagide’enmodaa Nibi: Occupons-nous de l’eau,” un projet fonde par le Reseau des eaux canadiennes. Cette initiative veut promouvoir l’autonomie des communautes autochtones et leurs decisions se rapportant a l’eau et aux eaux usees qui historiquement etaient soumises a des controles dictes par le gouvernement pour la qualite de l’eau, la securite. Souvent les projets etaient en conflit avec le savoir traditionnel et local de l’eau. Dans un esprit de collaboration, le projet cherche a etablir des facons d’inciter les dirigeants autochtones, les ingenieurs des Premieres nations et ceux de l’Ouest, les autochtones instruits ainsi que les membres des communautes Inuit et Premieres Nations a travailler ensemble, creant ainsi un cadre specifique aux communautes et culturellement approprie. En particulier, nous regardons comment le savoir traditionnel autochtone et la connaissance scientifique pourraient se recouper par le biais de nos relations et des nouvelles responsabilites face a l’eau.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.015
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian women's studiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207