MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009036958

Dialogue, displacement and return - contexts of a journey on a two-way road: Anishinaabek responses to all-weather roads through Waabanong Nakaygum: memory and continuity on the eastern shores of Lake Winnipeg and beyond

2014· dissertation· en· W7009036958 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShoreHomelandPeriod (music)Vegetation (pathology)BoomWork (physics)Cultural landscapeStorm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

East of Lake Winnipeg is what conservationists call the ‘east shore wilderness’ / ‘heart of the boreal.’ The largest contiguous tract of unindustrialized boreal forest on Earth, this area has been the focus of 15 years of discussion and planning in Manitoba. The area is also designated Waabanong Nakaygum, a homeland to the Anishinaabek of this bush-meets-lake region. Waabanong has seen limited access during the industrial period of personal mechanized mobility due to a lack of constructed all-weather roads. However, an older pattern of travel and mobility does exist across the land, for centuries constituting traditional Anishinaabek patterns of land use and trade. As all-weather roads are being constructed along Lake Winnipeg, oral interviews will examine the question: will the older trails remain in the collective culture of the people or shall the north-south cultural and economic flows replace the east-west bush history traced by the rivers that wind through?

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)0.005
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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→