MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2708676233 · doi:10.7202/1040148ar

“Our connection makes us stronger”: Inuit youth’s strategies to feel comfortable in Ottawa

2017· article· en· W2708676233 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stéphanie Vaudry

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial connectednessIndigenousEveryday lifeAgency (philosophy)Face (sociological concept)SociologyGeographyGender studiesPsychologySocial psychologyEcologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on challenges young Inuit adults face in everyday life in the city and the coping strategies they have developed. For research participants, being “connected” with the world(s) surrounding them appears to be central to how they feel and orientate themselves in the city. Connectedness, for these young Inuit, translates into close and significant relationships with people, ancestors, future generations, objects, animals, and nature, which are elements of the Inuit universe of meanings and, more broadly, belong to Indigenous universes. Therefore, being comfortable is linked to the maintenance of harmonious relationships with these different agents. As we will see, urban milieus, like Ottawa, belong to a universe of meanings to which Inuit youth are not always accustomed. Nevertheless, through their agency, they develop strategies to establish relationships within the city, enabling themselves to become acquainted with the urban world and its inhabitants. As Ottawa hosts a large Inuit community, the urban challenges that they face can be mitigated as they participate in Inuit worlds.

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)0.002
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 score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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