In Her Own Words: An Experiential Inquiry into Outdoor Adventure Narratives in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores outdoor adventure narratives, blending insights from outdoor literature and personal lived experience. Using an intuitive inquiry methodology, this study consists of five iterative cycles. In cycle 1 the research topic is selected and refined. Cycle 2 then critically examines paradigmatic texts to identify key themes. These are presented alongside personal statements to create a set of preliminary research lenses. In cycle 3, I undertake a series of solo backpacking trips in British Columbia and report them from an embodied, first-person perspective. Cycle 4 then revisits previously articulated lenses in light of subjective insights gained from cycle 3 to highlight transformations in understanding. Cycle 5 synthesizes the findings and discusses potential relevance for the broader outdoor community. Findings indicate the need to expand upon existent narratives to include diverse voices, particularly those of women and individuals with intersecting identities, to promote inclusivity and representation within the outdoor community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".