“Knowing Who We Are... It’s One of the Most Important Things”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous identity is an important aspect of health. For Anishinaabeg, identity contributes to Mino-Bimaadiziwin (the Good Life), which involves individuals becoming their fullest selves supported by their holistic wellness (i.e. mind, body, spirit, heart), in relationship to people, place, and all our relatives. However, Algonquin identity has been deeply impacted by over 400 years of settler colonialism. Colonialism has disrupted Algonquin people’s connections to land, as well as their kinships, cultures, and communities – all of which inform Algonquin identity. Further, domestic law and policy have altered definitions of Indigeneity in Canada and imposed racist and heteropatriarchal structures that oppress and threaten Indigenous women and gender-diverse people in particular. Indigenous storytelling has been a way for Indigenous peoples to combat colonial narratives imposed upon them. It is a method of truth-telling – an opportunity to honour and uplift Indigenous experience. Therefore, this project utilizes storytelling through the conversational method to explore Algonquin identity among 13 Algonquin women and gender-diverse people from Mattawa and North Bay, Ontario. Results demonstrate diverse, complex histories of displacement and cultural resurgence, and explore embodiments of gender, sexuality, and Indigeneity that are actively being lived out while firmly rooted in a shared history. More Algonquin stories are need to further explore identity as an important component of Mino-Bimaadiziwin.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".