MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295780306 · doi:10.14430/arctic75612

Historical Reindeer Corrals as Portraits of Human-Nature Relationships in Northern Finland

2022· article· en· W4295780306 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sari Stark, Outi Manninen, Oona Ilmolahti, Maria Lähteenmäki

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAcademy of Finland
KeywordsHerdingSubarctic climateGeographyPhysical geographyVegetation (pathology)ArchaeologyPeatBorealTaigaEcologyForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reindeer herding has been practised in northern boreal and subarctic regions of Fennoscandia for several centuries. The gathering and separation of reindeer for slaughter and calf marking are significant and cyclical activities of reindeer herding that are commonly carried out in reindeer corrals composed of circular-shaped fences of wood or stone construction leading into the corral. Using archaeological databases, we mapped historical reindeer corrals in northern Finland dating from the late 1800s to the 1960s for the entire reindeer herding area and characterized the legacies of their past use on present-day vegetation in Peräpohjola. In total, 94 corrals were located. Reindeer separations created a niche for novel plant communities with increasing graminoids in relation to dwarf shrubs and formation of a dense birch grove. Corrals have also preserved old rare trees left standing inside the corral to provide shelter for reindeer. The positioning of the corrals in the landscape was usually planned in a way that utilized man-made constructions and natural barriers, such as peatlands, and the typical behaviour of the reindeer in combination with both. When the wooden constructions had collapsed and decomposed, only the different vegetation indicates their past existence.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207