MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283793835 · doi:10.25071/2563-3694.97

Hoea Te Waka ki Uta

2022· article· en· W4283793835 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Sociology Journal of Critical Praxis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMormonism, Religion, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaikatoUniversity of Otago
KeywordsIndigenousSociologyIndigenous cultureThe RenaissanceGender studiesAnthropologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following is a reflective commentary on the place of Critical Indigenous Studies, with a focus on Kaupapa Māori Research, within Mormon Studies. Specifically, the piece explores the following questions: What does Kaupapa Māori Research look like when engaging in Mormon Studies? What positionality needs to be taken by Kaupapa Māori researchers and Critical Indigenous scholars when engaging in Mormon Studies? What are the main areas Critical Indigenous scholars and Kaupapa Māori scholars should engage when tackling issues around Mormonism? These questions are important in light of the growing importance of the cultural renaissance in Te Ao Māori and the rise of Kaupapa Māori Research.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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