MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399934807 · doi:10.1139/as-2023-0046

Ways of identifying lichen and plant species by the Nenets reindeer herders in Yamal

2024· article· en· W4399934807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roza Laptander, Florian Stammler, Bruce C. Forbes, Sari Stark

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversität HamburgNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLichenGeographyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yamal Nenets herders have historically developed a rich knowledge of lichens and vascular plants, which feature in the diet of their migratory reindeer herds in the tundra zone of northwest Siberia. In the Nenets language there are native names for certain species of lichens and other reindeer forage plants, including graminoids, herbs, shrubs, berries, and mushrooms. During participant fieldwork together with nomadic tundra Nenets herders, we documented names and definitions of reindeer food on herding territories during their long migration routes from the northern forest-tundra transition zone to the northern coastal tundra. Like many other Indigenous peoples of Siberia, Nenets have noticed that the Arctic is changing and some of its recent dynamics are seriously affecting their livelihood. The degradation of some lichen composition and cover on tundra pastures has also contributed to a decrease of herders’ linguistic palette for describing these losses in a concrete manner. Since the Nenets language is on the list of endangered languages of the world, this has an especially negative impact on the language skills and traditional knowledge of the younger generations of Nenets people, who may not know what these lichens look like and why they are important for the Nenets reindeer herding culture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207