MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Global Technoethics and Cultural Tensions in Canada

2010· book-chapter· en· W4234773996 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rocci Luppicini

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in information security, privacy, and ethics book series · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemiseProsperitySustainabilityGlobalizationPoliticsPolitical scienceCultural identityFace (sociological concept)Environmental ethicsPolitical economySociologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winston Churchill once said that history is written by the victors. This statement from Churchill highlights the challenge that marginalized local cultures face in the global world and how important parts of their cultural history can get left behind and forgotten in the drive for national prosperity in the global economy. This chapter focuses on the cultural tensions that arise when a technology rich culture threatens the sustainability of a technology poor culture. A pilot case study of cultural tensions between aboriginal people and dominant French and English Canadian populations. This pilot study explores how technoethical considerations are intertwined with historical, political, and social factors that have threatened the sustainability of aboriginal culture in Canada. Findings suggest that more attention must be invested to ensure that that globalization efforts by technology rich dominant cultures do not lead to the demise of technology poor marginalized cultures. Given the longstanding history and broad scope of aboriginal problems in Canada efforts to revive the cultural history and identity of aboriginal people is suggested as one option to help rebuild aboriginal trust and willingness to collaborate with dominant Canadian populations on global initiatives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0310.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in information security, privacy, and ethics book seriesSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207