MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037465455 · doi:10.1215/00141801-8025268

“Coyote Broke the Dams”: Power, Reciprocity, and Conflict in Fish Weir Narratives and Implications for Traditional and Contemporary Fisheries

2020· article· en· W3037465455 on OpenAlexaff
Morgan Ritchie, Bill Angelbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnohistory · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsDouglas CollegeUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeirNarrativeReciprocity (cultural anthropology)IndigenousPoliticsSociologyPower (physics)Environmental ethicsFisheryPolitical scienceGeographySocial scienceEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines the social and political implications of the geographically widespread and cross-cultural oral narratives related to the releases of salmon into the rivers of the Pacific Northwest through the destruction of weir-dams. Key themes in these narratives provide insights into indigenous concepts of reciprocity and authority, which in turn reveal dimensions of social organization and intercommunity interactions from a new perspective. These narratives explicitly foreground the inevitable tensions between communities that relied on salmon and also sought to prioritize their own interests, seeking exclusive use of weirs, occasionally to the detriment of other groups. This study illustrates how these narratives convey episodes of contradictory interests, exploitation, social struggle, reconciliation, and a moral charter for communities over a broad area. The analysis also highlights how the messages of these narratives are just as pertinent today as they were in the past.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnohistorySame topicAmerican Environmental and Regional HistoryFrench-language works237,207