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
Although dominant western narratives often imply otherwise, mining is not just a colonial idea or activity. First Nations have been mining and quarrying rocks and minerals for thousands of years, using the extracted materials for cultural, spiritual, medicinal, and practical purposes. The literature documenting the use of rocks and minerals by First Nations peoples has been produced by archaeologists, and very little is known about these activities within the context of mining engineering and geoscience. By documenting the knowledge, resource management and science behind First Nations use of rocks, minerals and mining, we can contribute to the decolonization of the mining sector, while also helping to drive much needed innovation. The mining industry is now evolving to focus more attention on smaller and lower grade deposits, reprocessing of waste, sourcing independent supplies of critical minerals, and Indigenous reconciliation. Continued advances in these areas, inspired from the lessons of First Nations mining, are needed to transition the industry on a path to social and environmental sustainability. Working with Indigenous peoples to incorporate Indigenous ways of knowing into mine design and reclamation could be the key to overcoming the challenges ahead.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it