MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787452928 · doi:10.1139/as-2017-0034

Inuvialuit traditional ecological knowledge of beluga whale (<i>Delphinapterus leucas</i>) under changing climatic conditions in Tuktoyaktuk, NT

2018· article· en· W2787452928 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Devin Waugh, Tristan Pearce, Sonja Ostertag, Verna Pokiak, Peter Collings, Lisa L. Loseto

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleBelugaLeucasGeographyArcticClimate changeEcologyContext (archaeology)FisheryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper documents Inuvialuit traditional ecological knowledge of beluga, including ecology and behavior, hunting techniques, and food preparation under changing climatic conditions in Tuktoyaktuk, NT. Beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) is an important food source for Inuvialuit in the western Canadian Arctic, a region that is experiencing dramatic climate change. Data were collected using semi-directed interviews with 17 Inuvialuit beluga harvesters and participant observation. The research found that Inuvialuit beluga harvesters possess detailed rational knowledge of beluga, particularly regarding hunting techniques and food preparation, both which are guided by a moral code about how to behave with respect to beluga. In terms of beluga ecology and behavior, Inuvialuit knowledge is limited to anecdotal reasoning drawing on generalized observations of beluga and the accounts of others. Inuvialuit are experiencing the effects of climate change, but seem to be coping thus far in the context of beluga harvesting but ongoing change in the region may increase the risks associated with hunting and preparing beluga in the future.

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)0.002
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 score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207