Ouvindo as vozes não ouvidas: análise do documentário “Qapirangajug: inuit knowledge and climate change”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Popularizados a partir dos anos 2000, os documentários sobre crise climática compartilham entre si algumas características, como a presença de um narrador, os testemunhos de especialistas e cientistas sobre o assunto e imagens de um planeta em estado de calamidade. Existem, no entanto, exceções, como é o caso de “Qapirangajug: Inuit Knowledge and Climate Change”, média-metragem de 2010 codirigido por Zacharias Kunuk e Ian Mauro que dão voz ativa não aos experts, mas sim às vítimas do aquecimento global no Ártico: os inuítes. Através da análise de conteúdo dos depoimentos registrados no filme e de revisão bibliográfica, o presente estudo objetiva ressaltar como a produção valoriza os saberes tradicionais dos inuítes para, em seguida, estabelecer um diálogo com os estudos de autores como Donna Haraway, Anna Tsing, Bruno Latour e Ailton Krenak como ferramenta para compreender nossa atual condição climática.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".