Who’s at the table: an exploration of community-based food security initiatives and structures in a north-central Canadian context
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines food security initiatives and actors specific to a rural, remote and northern Canadian community, a context found throughout the world. Using a ‘snowball technique’ to identify experts and practitioners in local food security, we employed qualitative engagement methods to map initiatives, actors and gaps in regional food security. We identified concerns around the ability of the region to be food secure; we also found a lack of cross-sector communication and planning, challenges with a small group of committed actors facing isolation and burnout and a need to more broadly engage the community and political entities with limited awareness of rural and remote cultures and concerns. Facilitating better collaborations across multiple food security-related activities while honouring current and supporting current initiatives could enable those who know their communities, to address food insecurity collectively and collaboratively in a rural, remote and northern context.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it