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
In this article we discuss how the incorporation of selected technologies (i.e., outboard motor, snowmobile) in Northern Ontario profoundly and irrevocably transformed two Cree nations located in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. We demonstrate how this technological integration has provided two remote First Nations in Canada with the ability to adapt to biophysical and socio-cultural changes, thereby sustaining traditional livelihood and providing food security. Interviews conducted in 2006–2010 with the Weenusk First Nation at Peawanuck, and the Washaho First Nation at Fort Severn are used to contextualize the discussion and answer the following research questions: (a) Are a greater or smaller number of people in these two First Nations engaged in subsistence behaviour today than in the past?; (b) Are these harvesters more or less successful?; and (c) Are levels of subsistence consumption different? The findings indicate that while less people are generally participating in traditional subsistence activities, access to traditional foods due to technology remains, for the time being, the same. The sustainability of these activities on the long-term is examined in the conclusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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