Wilksilaks transfer of knowledge: A working model for maintaining tradition.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nisga'a cultural artifact repatriation efforts began from the moment the artifacts were removed from Nisga'a communities. This qualitative study presents Nisga'a repatriation from a different perspective than in the current literature. An indigenous paradigm is developed and used to examine Nisga'a repatriation from within the Nisga'a worldview. Two interconnected groups of Nisga'a elders and wilksilaks (relatives on paternal side having specific obligations) revealed the connection of tradition to Nisga'a repatriation efforts spanning four generations of the author's family. It is revealed that the knowledge of the importance and significance of repatriation to the Nisga'a community was held in trust and transferred to each generation to its successful completion. This research is important for two reasons: (1) it adds to the current ethnography of the Northwest Coast describing the wilksilaks (relatives on paternal side having specific obligations) in a matrilineal culture and (2) it demonstrates how traditional institutions adapted to deal with contemporary issues, like repatriation of cultural artifacts. --P.ii.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".