Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks at the concept of miyo pimatiswin (a good life) as it relates to the Northwest Métis culture’s, views, values, and way of life. The concept shows that miyo pimatisiwin (in plains “y” dialect, miyo is “good”) encompasses the four elements of the emotional, mental, spiritual, and physical ways of living one’s life on the land and in community. These four elements are nurtured through prayer and a shared community contribution of wealth that fosters the spiritual aspect, which, in turn, contributes to good emotional and mental health. This has often happened through the use of oral storytelling and oral history, which reveal important life lessons such as empathy and compassion, as well as humour. These conveyed lessons contribute to the physical aspects of self, and encourage a strong work ethic. Oral stories have been an important tradition, including teaching, listening, and striving towards keeping the elements in balance. The research for this article is based on the literature, my own background, and stories or lessons passed on by my own father, Dan Ross, and how he lived the concept of miyo-pimatisiwin. I conclude by arguing that the traditional concept of miyo-pimatisiwin (a good life) is essential for Métis people in present day, as it was throughout Métis history. Working as a community in modern-day life, we can collectively and collaboratively continue to work towards self-determination and a healthy self-governance system, as well as a Métis Nation Constitution that promotes miyo pimatiswin. This article is a chapter in the open textbook Indigenous Self-Determination through Mitho Pimachesowin (Ability to Make a Good Living), developed for the University of Saskatchewan course Indigenous Studies 410/810 and hosted by the Northern Review.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; 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".