MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Beading Witness: Notes on (S)kin

2025· article· en· W4413149209 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marissa Magneson

Bibliographic record

VenuePawaatamihk A Journal of Métis Thinkers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitnessNext of kinPsychologyHistoryPolitical scienceLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In “Imaginary Spaces of Conciliation and Reconciliation,” Métis scholar and artist David Garneau reflects on two paintings that document gatherings through comic-style images with speech bubbles, but no text. These works, as Garneau explains, serve as mnemonic devices that capture the relationships, exchanges, and emotions in the room without revealing the content, relying on a coded visual language that requires deeper understanding (Garneau, 2012). This act of omission can also be seen as a form of refusal, acknowledging that some things are not meant to be shared (Simpson, 2007). Inspired by Garneau’s approach, I translated my reflections from the 2024 Mawachihitotaak conference into autoethnographic field notes through beadwork on home-tanned fish skin leather. Each design, color, and symbol carries personal meaning, allowing me to decide what to reveal and what to conceal. While those present at the conference may interpret the beadwork with deeper insight, outsiders have a more limited understanding. Drawing from Michelle Porter’s exploration of memory mapping and oral storytelling (Porter, 2024), I pair beadwork photographs with select conference quotes, offering potential context without translating the full narrative. This work enacts refusal by not sharing every embedded story, as they are not mine to fully tell.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePawaatamihk A Journal of Métis ThinkersSame topicLaw in Society and CultureFrench-language works237,207