MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

First Nations’ Survivance and Sovereignty in Canada during a Time of COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3153476371 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robyn Rowe, Julia Rowat, Jennifer Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Indian Culture and Research Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSovereigntyPandemicPoliticsSmallpoxPolitical scienceEconomic growthSociologyPolitical economyDevelopment economicsLawCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VirologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First Nations people in Canada have demonstrated and continue to demonstrate persistent and resilient cultural, linguistic, and traditional endurance: survivance. The devastation resulting from centuries of health pandemics such as smallpox, influenza, cholera, tuberculosis, measles, and scarlet fever reinforce the ongoing resilience of First Nations people, cultures, and traditions in Canada. Despite the history of pandemic-related trauma and a myriad of social, political, environmental, and health challenges, as well as the added burden that COVID-19 is placing on the healthcare system in Canada, First Nations’ organizations and leadership are enacting their inherent rights to sovereignty and governance. While First Nations are bracing for the expected negative impacts of COVID-19, they are doing so in ways that respect and honor their histories, cultures, languages, and traditions. First Nations are acting to protect some of the most vulnerable people in their communities including elders, knowledge keepers, and storytellers who carry with them irreplaceable traditional and cultural knowledges.

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)0.006
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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0500.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Indian Culture and Research JournalSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207