Bibliographic record
Abstract
My thesis exhibition Mniku, translating to island in Mi’kmaw, consists of a series of carvings, paintings, drawings and interactive sound installation. Each piece in the exhibition is a representation of the island of Ktaqamkuk (Newfoundland) itself. With each piece created I strived to find a visual balance between known Mi’kmaq and Beothuk designs while dismantling western interpretations and understandings of time and space. The thesis exhibition and this support paper follow my journey in attempting to revisit known and speculative sites of both Beothuk and Mi’kmaq settlement in Ktaqamkuk through both a physical and artistic journey. Most early historical documentation I encountered concerning the Beothuk and Mi’kmaq of Ktaqamkuk was from a western colonial perspective, and through that writing I believe it is impossible to fully know the true history of our people. There is currently little critical analysis of this historical writing, which creates more questions than answers. It is my intention to demonstrate the impact of these documents in relationship to my research/creation methodology, as a response in part to the colonial tradition and assumptions based in this historical documentation. The research I have undertaken here will allow me to apply my findings into future research, writing and artistic creation. The intention of my work is to question historical and contemporary writing, assumptions and interpretations of Mi’kmaq and Beothuk relations and to add to future dialogue and discourse in this area.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".