Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is after I encountered other indigenous cultures that I understood the voice inside of me, speaking of cultural recovery. I traveled in developing countries like India, Nepal, Thailand, and many others, but never did I truly understand the call for the recovery of my culture more than when I lived in indigenous communities in Canada and New Zealand, especially in Maliotenam in Northern Quebec, where I received spiritual teachings. I grew up in France as an Algerian and a Kabyle. I knew about my heritage vaguely, thanks to the stories my mother told me, but the colonial and Cartesian thinking of the French society always undermined them. This is why I had to break free from this reductive approach, seeking a more intoned and in-depth methodology that connected with the spiritual part of my identity as well. Story telling appeared to be the best way for me to share my experience. Of course, being a member of the community, I could not just go to my village and simply inquire about stories of the past. I also needed to contextualize my inquiry in the present time with a methodology that brought something back to my village: involving my participants into the inquiry raising questions in groups and bringing elders to reflect on the story of our Ancestor.KeywordsIndigenous CommunityIndigenous CultureCultural RecoverySpiritual TeachingSociopolitical PositionThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".