“If They Were Important, We Would Have Heard About Them”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The community of Gjoa Haven/Uqsuqtuuq has recently received national and international attention for its proximity to the lost ships of the nineteenth century Franklin expedition. The locating of Franklin’s ships in 2014 and 2016 has been followed by celebrations of the role of Inuit knowledge in finding the wrecks, and thought to hold promise for how Inuit and Western research partnerships are conducted. Yet many people in Gjoa Haven, and particularly its youth, have little knowledge of or interest in the Franklin story. Locally, Franklin stores are associated with Qablunaat (non-Inuit) interests in northern history, but they are not representative of Inuit history. We examine the relationship between Inuit and Qablunaat history in Gjoa Haven, with a focus on what is important to its youth. Although Franklin stories are of limited importance in Inuit history, they continue to influence how Inuit are perceived by non-Inuit and present obstacles to informing Qablunaat about Inuit history and culture. As young Inuit have more opportunities to interact with Qablunaat, the subject of history offers space for these youth to articulate their own views and priorities for learning and sharing northern stories.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.008 |
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".