MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6940825766 · doi:10.11575/prism/42356

Building Resiliency: Learnings from Water Management Approaches in Indigenous Communities near Grande Cache, Alberta

2023· other· en· W6940825766 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousResource (disambiguation)Resilience (materials science)Traditional knowledgeResource management (computing)Psychological resilienceFace (sociological concept)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Indigenous communities face an ongoing issue in Canada: access to adequate, sustainable, and acceptable safe drinking water. The problem extends to the hamlet of Grande Cache and the surrounding Indigenous communities that comprise the five Co-operatives and two Enterprises. Although there is previous literature regarding water availability concerns and infrastructural limitations in Indigenous communities, there is a need to explore community-specific barriers and opportunities for resilience building in rural and remote settings. The research delves into the experiences, perceptions, and actions of the Indigenous communities surrounding Grande Cache, ultimately aiming to provide insights into how these communities have navigated water-related challenges, their outlook for potential resource extraction impacts, and their broader resilience-building efforts. This research contributes to a deeper comprehension of the community-specific factors that influence the desired water management methods. This may offer insights for local decision-makers to strengthen water resource management and improve community well-being.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→