MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407949357 · doi:10.1080/00187259.2025.2452394

Conceptualizing communities of place and practice: Applied Anthropology in a federal context

2025· article· en· W4407949357 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Patricia M. Clay

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Organization · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropology: Ethics, History, Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationPacific Islands Fisheries Science CenterUniversity of TorontoAtlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
KeywordsContext (archaeology)AnthropologySociologyApplied anthropologyEnvironmental ethicsGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the first anthropologist hired in a NOAA Fisheries research laboratory devoted to fisheries science in support of fisheries management in federal waters, I faced many challenges. Federal laws required social impact assessment of fishery management plans, use of ecosystem-based management, and taking into account the impacts to fishers and fishing communities of both of these. But laws provide overarching guidance and policy documents need to refine the focus for research. I led the working group that wrote this guidance for fishing communities. Multidisciplinary teams of social and natural scientists today continue refining our understanding of the connections of communities to fisheries, whether commercial, recreational, or subsistence – or some combination. I also helped to develop a conceptual model for the Northeast Region ecosystem, and led an oral history research project examining the implementation across Europe of a NOAA Fisheries process model for ecosystem assessment. Although the hiring of anthropologists, sociologists, and others has become normalized, we are still few in number nationwide, so more work remains to be done.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0210.112
Scholarly communication0.0120.022
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman OrganizationSame topicAnthropology: Ethics, History, CultureFrench-language works237,207