Bibliographic record
Abstract
When you think of a land acknowledgement, what first comes to mind? Giving thanks to the land you are on or another boring mandatory reading someone standing in front of you was forced to read out. All too often the moment a land acknowledgement is read, settler people tend to tune out. A land acknowledgement is a performative act that is done usually in a professional setting. Usually, a settler representative stands up in front of a group of people and gives “appreciation” to the land the group of people are residing on. One could look at the performative act of land acknowledgements as a performative act. For the past three years, as an Indigenous person, I have been observing in Treat 7 known as Universities in Alberta, Canada which demands that at the beginning of each semester, each teacher either makes their own or uses the school-instituted land acknowledgement. Upon hearing the same land acknowledgement a few dozen times, I began to wonder what the importance of a land acknowledgement doing if no care is given. Throughout my three years at university, my focus has been decolonizing myself and the world around me. After reflecting on the ineffectiveness of the performative act of land acknowledgements, I wanted to decolonize land acknowledgements and their use of them.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".