MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777015888

Community Life and Development Programs – Pathways to Healing

2014· article· en· W2777015888 on OpenAlex
Helen Milroy, Pat Dudgeon, Roz Walker

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity developmentProcess managementComputer scienceEnvironmental planningBusinessEconomic growthGeographyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides an overarching framework for understanding the components of healthy<br/>communities through a healing and community life development approach. The chapter<br/>explores three major themes covering the nature of the trauma that has occurred over many<br/>generations and continues to be experienced in the present. These are:<br/><br/>- the extreme sense of powerlessness and loss of control;<br/>- the profound sense of loss, grief and disconnection; and<br/>- the overwhelming sense of trauma and helplessness.<br/><br/>In turn, there are three pathways to recovery to address each of these areas of trauma that have<br/>occurred as a consequence of the history of colonisation and its impacts:<br/><br/>- self-determination and community governance;<br/>- reconnection and community life; and<br/>- restoration and community resilience.<br/><br/>Most significantly we argue that Aboriginal worldviews, developing a comprehensive, holistic<br/>approach that focuses on individual, family and community strengths whilst at the same time<br/>addressing the needs of the community, is both a more culturally acceptable and effective<br/>approach to address these issues.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.287 · 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