Moving Forward Together: Weaving Indigenous and Western Sciences with Practices and Peoples in Aquatic Research in Inuit Nunangat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change and development are causing rapid and profound changes in aquatic ecosystems across Inuit Nunangat, the homelands of Inuit in what is now known as Canada.Shared concerns regarding ecological integrity and fundamental knowledge gaps are increasingly drawing Inuit communities and researchers together in partnerships that center Indigenous voices to understand local change.In this thesis, I reviewed the practices of weaving Indigenous and Western sciences in coastal and marine research and monitoring, where an exploration of decision points that shape co-developed projects highlighted a diversity of possible research pathways.Additionally, I collaborated with the community of Kinngait, Nunavut to document Indigenous knowledge of environmental and biodiversity change in marine and lacustrine ecosystems through a questionnaire.This valuable record may inform community decision-making and planning, and will serve future generations.This thesis provides insights to facilitate continued efforts towards meaningful relationships between Inuit and researchers in environmental discourses.
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 | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".