Bibliographic record
Abstract
aanii. wabidi ge name ndinaawemaag. waaseya’sin ndizhnikaaz. bawating ndonjibaa ge obishkikaang ndonjibaa. nogojiwonong ditaa nongom. ndaanis nozhemenhs dizhnikaazyin. “ishkigamizigan: the sugarbush” is an actualization of my relationship with the sugar bush. This piece is a living example of reclamation, restoration and revitalization of Anishinaabe women’s relationship with the environment, particularly the sugar bush. It is an expression of my gratitude for the life that the sugar bush in Mississauga Anishinaabe homelands has generated for my family. According to Midewewinini James Dumont, the beginning of the beginning of our Anishinaabe creation story begins with Creation emitting a sound outward into the world; after a long period of silence, sound came back, and in that way the existence of life was confirmed. The importance of sound for invigorating life inspired the audio form of this submission. I felt that poetic words and metaphor in textual form would not be as close to a debwewin (i.e. truthful, heartful) expression of my reclaimed relationship with the sugar bush as audio recording and production would. Sound brings forth the life of ishkigamizigan in a way that my words on paper could not convey; sound also reflects the life that exists in the reciprocal relationship between myself and ishkigamizigan. Chi-miigwech to my Elders, teachers, and helpers who contributed to the creation of this piece through the sharing of their knowledge (i.e. language, practical skill, technology) and time: Odawa Anishinaabe Gichi Piitzijid Shirley Williams, Michi Saagiik Anishinaabe Gichi Piitzijid Gidigaa Migizi (Doug Williams), Odawa Anishinaabe language teacher Vera Bell, Trent Radio, and Zoongde Damien Lee.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.113 | 0.013 |
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".