Bibliographic record
Abstract
Situated in Toronto, Ontario on the traditional lands of the Huron, Wendat, Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, and the Mississauga of the New Credit First Nation, this chapter describes a community-led project to facilitate family reunification and supports for urban Indigenous parents, particularly woman-identifying or Two Spirit individuals, who have been in contact with the law. The chapter details the development process of a project both created by and accountable to community members from inception to analysis. Using this project as an example and guided by Two-Eyed Seeing, a framework which brings together Western and Indigenous approaches (Bartlett et al., 2012), the author reflects on the meaning of decolonizing research within the confines of several interacting colonial systems. Butsang discusses the concept of knowledge co-creation in the context of Indigenous health research and argues its necessity for any sustainable move towards decolonial praxis. The chapter explores the use of oral storytelling as a decolonizing method and its implications as a collaborative research method for social change, particularly in the realm of criminal justice.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 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 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".