MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329422456 · doi:10.1386/ajms.4.1.95_1

Navigating NDN youth networks: Media interventions among Aboriginal youth in Winnipeg

2015· article· en· W2329422456 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathleen Buddle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationContemplationSpace (punctuation)SociologyMedia studiesPsychological interventionCriminologyPublic relationsPolitical sciencePsychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aboriginal media offers a viable alternative to Aboriginal gang life largely because Native media employs the same principles for communication that inform Aboriginal gang practice. Rather than individual advancement, both aspire to bring people together in physical space. The history of constraints placed on Aboriginal peoples’ capacities to assemble in public is part of what informs the collectivizing goals of Aboriginal gangs and of Aboriginal communications agencies more generally. Both provide critically important contact zones, where diverse interest groups gather to negotiate, to perform and to exchange ideas about contemporary Aboriginality and Aboriginal youth experience. Media spaces, however, unlike gang turf, create pro-social discursive space for the discussion and contemplation of Aboriginal ways of engaging in the world. The Aboriginal films that circulate through the film festival circuit, for example, address themes that are sometimes difficult to discuss, such as bullying, solvent abuse and suicide.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Journalism & Media StudiesSame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207