MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886234823 · doi:10.31031/rism.2018.02.000549

Are there Unique Aspects to Indigenous Sports that Go beyond Competition?

2018· article· en· W2886234823 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch & Investigations in Sports Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousLeagueCompetition (biology)Public relationsOrder (exchange)PsychologyMarketingAdvertisingSociologyPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a former gym teacher and Indigenous person who began his teaching career in a mid- northern Anishnabé school in the 1980’s, I noticed certain peculiarities about my students when playing sports that weren’t noticeable in the south. Even though I was from an Indigenous background, the fact that I was from a more urbanized area meant in order to play organized team sports I had to comply with the values of the majority culture, a win at all cost attitude that had sometimes prevented me from participating in team sports. Teams were chosen not based on ones potential to learn a sport, but rather on what was sometimes referred to as natural ability. This meant teams in the majority non-Indigenous culture were built on whether one could contribute to a team’s performance and if you were perceived as not been adequate to a teams needs because of lack of ability, then you were discarded from the team. Your only chance was to hope there was a lower league to play in that would take you. In the end I stayed closer to individual sports than team sports because I knew I was going to be disappointed if I tried out for a team in the city.

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)0.003
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch & Investigations in Sports MedicineSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207