Giving and receiving life from Anishinaabe nibi inaakonigewin (our water law) research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Being a mother is a defining life role for Anishinaabe women. We are many other things but our role as mother is given to us directly by, and connects us to, Mother Earth. In ceremonies, we often go back to the relationship between mother and child to help us understand who we are as people and our purpose in life. One example is the sweat lodge that symbolizes the womb of a mother and the purification and new beginning that the ceremony can bring. From the Anishinaabemowin language we know that to be a mother is not only the role of a birth mother, but that of a mother’s sisters (a child’s aunts) as well. As mothers, aunties and close friends, we can be mothers to all of our children. For me, the research relating to water that I discuss in this chapter is likehaving and beginning to raise a child. It is what I consider to be a step in a lifelong learning, teaching, sharing and caring role in relation to water and the teachings that flow from it. Children are born of water. This water is carried by their mothers for the express purpose of creating and bringing life. We are all made up in large part of water and we need water in our daily lives to sustain our bodies and spirits. Our life comes from and depends on water. I analogize this research and the phases of its development to the coming to life of a child through conception, birth and what we learn as young children. Vine Deloria reminds us that our “cultures are rich with ways of gathering, discovering, and uncovering knowledge. They are as near as our dreams and as close as our relationships” (Deloria 1996, p. 182). The research methodology described in the context of this water law research tells us how to grow and learn together. This is not a methodology or research design that belongs to me, but rather is an evolving participant-designed project. This methodology was gifted to all of the participants (Elders, students, other participants and me) through the process of working together, sitting together in ceremony, and reflecting on our purpose in a way that reflects Anishinaabe ways of being that are both historic and contemporary.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it