MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884062813 · doi:10.14288/1.0365997

Embodying the past in the present for the future : practicing, supporting and highlighting Indigenous tattoo revivals through Indigenous and creative research methodologies

2018· article· en· W2884062813 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dion Kaszas

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTattoo and Body Piercing Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousEngineering ethicsSociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceEngineeringEcologyBiologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I began the exploration of my ancestral (Nlaka'pamux) tattooing practices as a way to learn about the things that I had been denied the ability to learn in my grandmother's home community due to the legislative violence enacted upon my family and I by the Indian Act. In this thesis I will share the story of my journey moving from exploring my ancestral tattooing traditions to reviving Nlaka’pamux tattooing practices, and supporting the revival of Indigenous tattooing in Canada. The two main questions that I have sought an answer to in the pages of this research assessment portfolio are: how is a sleeping tattooing tradition awakened? And, how do I honor my Nlaka'pamux oral culture in the course of obtaining a Master of Arts degree? In answering these questions, I outline the steps that I took, what and who inspired and encouraged me, and share some of the knowledge and resources that fuelled me in the revival of Nlaka’pamux tattooing. This project looks not only at the steps and processes I took in the revival of my ancestral tattooing tradition, but I also invited four additional voices to share their journeys and their stories. They are the voices of Indigenous tattoo artists and cultural tattoo practitioners who are involved in reviving traditional tattooing practices. The combination of our stories outlines a clear narrative and logical path that can 1) support Indigenous tattoo artists as a community, 2) provide critical grounding and guidance on revival. Addressing these issues meaningfully can support education and further research for individuals and groups seeking knowledge about Indigenous tattoo revival, and 3) Move towards honoring oral culture and traditions through interdisciplinary methods, theory, and representation. This exploration of Indigenous tattoo revival has been undertaken using Nlaka’pamux, Indigenous and creative research methodologies. This thesis sought to indigenize my academic and tattooing practice.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.039
Scholarly communication0.0190.010
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicTattoo and Body Piercing ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207