Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground is the transition across the surface and subsurface of the land, mediating environmental change and the stability of geological time. In the Canadian Arctic, dramatic seasonal cycles and warming trends are reshaping increasingly unstable ground. Inuit in communities such as Arviat, in southern Nunavut, have always dealt with geological instability using their traditional knowledge of climate and territory. However, the North has been aggressively shaped by systematic spatial interventions of resource-based economies, militarization, and administration. Federal building programs across the Territory have imposed visions of efficiency and modernity, transforming the land inhabited by Inuit into a settled ground. To “unsettle ground” is understood here as strategies to address gaps between the imposed stability and singularity of modernist, Northern master planning and housing and the richness and fluidity of the Indigenous landscape. Two trips to Arviat and extensive meetings with community members and housing advocates revealed numerous instabilities, including geological changes, adaptation of the Community Plan, and uncertain economics of public housing. Housing has failed to engage the land on a perfunctory technical level, in its ability to create a communal “social ground”, and on a larger scale the ongoing failure of community planning disregards community relationships to landscape. Conversations on the ground revealed community-centered building practices reclaiming spaces imposed by the strictures of modern colonial architecture and planning. Our research thus examines the multiple identities of ground and posits the possibility for new, respectful ways for architecture to inhabit the land in Nunavut while unsettling ground.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".