OHMi-Nunavik: a multi-thematic and cross-cultural research program studying the cumulative effects of climate and socio-economic changes on Inuit communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adjusting to global climate and socio-environmental changes has become a major issue for many societies, especially in the Arctic. Many Inuit wish to better understand the changes taking place. In 2013, an international Observatory of Human–Environment Interactions (OHMi) was established in Nunavik to identify these changes, study their cumulative impact on the socio-ecosystem and to help develop adaptation measures to improve the well-being of Inuit communities. To this end, a team of academics and local Inuit partners joined forces to develop an integrated, interdisciplinary, collaborative research program. Using a participatory action research (PAR) approach, the OHMi Nunavik set the following research priorities: elder-youth knowledge transmission, northern agriculture, preservation of Inuit culture, language and identity, protected areas, mining employment, natural hazards and risks, and wildlife vulnerability. By strengthening the collaborations between multidisciplinary Canadian and French research teams, the OHMi Nunavik program integrates local and scientific knowledge both in planning the research and in disseminating the results.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".