MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041936608 · doi:10.5539/hes.v10n3p63

Miang Culture: The Community Resources Management Through “Design-Based Learning” for Self-Reliance of Highland Communities in the Upper Northern Thailand

2020· article· en· W3041936608 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Grit Piriyatachagul, Thongchai Phuwanatwichit, Charin Mangkhang, Atchara Sarobol

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural and Artistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizen journalismSustainabilityParticipatory action researchSociologyResource (disambiguation)Traditional knowledgeResource management (computing)Learning communityNatural resource managementKnowledge managementEnvironmental resource managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceNatural resourceEcologyPedagogyAnthropologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to describe the formation of Miang resource management of the highland communities in the Upper Northern Thailand through design-based learning which is the mechanism to learning the management of the communities’ resource for self-reliance derived from the solid and strong foundation of the communities. The method utilized in the quality research, collecting the information from the documentary study, participatory and non-participatory observation, and the deep interview with the community philosopher, and the data is analyzed by using the content analysis method. The research found that most of the highland communities in the Upper Northern Thailand located at the west of Phi Pan Nam Mountains have a lifestyle that connects with the participatory Miang resource management, have wisdom which is the innovation of design-based learning for self-reliance of the communities through the accumulating and the transfer of the knowledge from generation to a generation called “Miang Culture” which is created from the systematic design-based learning process through the wisely utilization of Miang resource existing in the community, and to cause the maximum sustainability based on the participation of the community without causing the trouble or breaching other’s right.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicCultural and Artistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207