MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226147155 · doi:10.4018/ijepr.299547

Pandemic Participation

2022· article· en· W4226147155 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kelly Panchyshyn, Jon Corbett

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of E-Planning Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsIndigenousContext (archaeology)SociologyCitizen journalismExpansiveTransparency (behavior)PandemicDistancingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political scienceGeographyLawArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article revisits the three foundational principles of Participatory Mapping practice identified in Good practices in participatory mapping. These include processes that strive for transparency, are unencumbered by time, and prioritize trust - the ‘Three T’s’. Authors Kelly Panchyshyn and Jon Corbett analyze the relevance of these principles under the spectre of the global COVID-19 pandemic. This reflection is carried out within the context of Kelly’s Master’s research. Over the course of 2020, Kelly worked with staff and citizens of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation to map Indigenous and non-Indigenous plant harvest foodways within Łu Zil Män, an expansive stretch of land on the edge of Whitehorse, Yukon. In exploring both the barriers and opportunities created by conducting this project during a pandemic, the authors determine that the ‘Three T’s’ remain essential for conducting meaningful participatory mapping. However, they also argue that each T takes on new dimensions within contexts of isolation and social distancing, particularly for Northern and Indigenous communities.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.381
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of E-Planning ResearchSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207