MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6886158929 · doi:10.15068/0002003291

The Inuit of Greenland: Doing Area Studies on the Compromise between Reciprocity and Utility

2020· article· en· W6886158929 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaLiquationProteogenomicsEmperipolesisDiafiltration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been pointed out that the concept of the relationship between humans and nature held by Greenland’s Inuit in comparison with Alaska and Canada contains a strong utilitarian perception that seeks to maximize and which exists in compromise with a reciprocal attitude towards nature. However almost no work has been done to unravel the process in which so to speak such a mixture was created. This paper summarizes the joint research that posed the question why such a relationship between humans and nature which is a compromise between reciprocity and utilitarianism was formed. We focused our attention on three factors that have been addressed in previous research only partially and have not been examined thoroughly enough: A . fusion with Christianity B . the processes of modernization and secularization and C . the cultural and social role of elders in the Inuit society.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207