Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mike, Jesse Unaapik and Kerry McCluskey. Families. Inhabit Media, 2017.The Inuit have always relied on a variety of family and community structures to raise children and ensure survival. Historically, given high death and disease rates, the need to go to larger centres for extended medical treatment, and long periods spent on the land, it was not unusual for children to be raised or partially raised by grandparents, aunts and uncles, or older siblings. Inuit traditional “custom adoption” practices allowed for child-rearing to be spread throughout families.In Families, Jesse Unaapik Mike explores a variety of families that are present in Inuit communities. The story is a first day of school scenario. During the day, a young boy, Talittuq, who lives alone with his mother while his father lives in another community, meets several children including those who live with two parents or step-parents, those who spend time with parents living in different places, and children living with grandparents. Mike also introduces what I believe to be the first instance of same-sex parents in an Inuit children’s picture book, when Talittuq meets Qaukkai, who has two Moms. There is an added twist in that Qaukkai has been adopted through a custom adoption process, giving her three mothers. While Lerry Lishchenko’s drawings are cartoon-like, the characters are drawn realistically. The colours are attractive and the images mesh well with the concepts in the text. This is a good book, where children from many different living arrangements will see themselves reflected. Highly recommended for public libraries and school libraries.Highly recommended: 4 stars out of 4Reviewer: Sandy CampbellSandy is a Health Sciences Librarian at the University of Alberta, who has written hundreds of book reviews across many disciplines. Sandy thinks that sharing books with children is one of the greatest gifts anyone can give.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.194 | 0.105 |
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".