Dream Knowledge – Understanding the Dreamworld Utilizing the Medicine Wheel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks at Indigenous dreaming and spirituality, which brings healing, greater resilience, and has the power to heal trauma. Analyzing dreams or ‘dream weaving’ is a conduit with a message that brings about healing and well-being (Lorenz, 2013; Riley-Mukavetz, 2021). To understand Indigenous dream culture, the Medicine Wheel is an essential tool for guiding one’s development – a methodology for understanding humanity and obtaining holistic guidance. There are many ways to use it, as it is a paradigm method used when teaching circle pedagogy. This sacred circle (Couture, 2011) provides a balance in spiritual and health connections that gives all members a chance to explain and debate, prior to determining a cause of action. Many ways exist of interpreting dreams, but it also necessary to focus on the wisdom and knowledge of Elders and others as guides, who are familiar with Indigenous spiritual perspectives. This article thus includes an evaluation of dreams, dream knowledge and a study of the use of the Medicine Wheel, along with spirituality. This dream knowledge presented reflects my own lived experience as an educator of settler-Indigenous background, as I use dreams to interpret my own spiritual, emotional, physical, and mental well-being.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".