A Story of Storytelling: Listening to Narratives of Belonging within the Indigenous Art Centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Indigenous Art Centre (IAC) is an Indigenous-led federal program that supports “the creation, preservation and promotion of contemporary art produced by Indigenous peoples in Canada.” Presently, the Indigenous Art Collection, around which the Centre is based, encompasses upwards of 4300 artworks produced by First Nations, Metis and Inuit artists dating from the 1950s to the present. Maintained by the Canadian federal department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC), the Centre is acknowledged by members of the Indigenous arts community as one of the most comprehensive overviews of the contemporary Indigenous art movement in Canada. The Collection is concomitantly endorsed by the federal government as an historically and culturally significant national heritage collection. The study explores the operational significance of the federal program, in the wake of Canada’s ratification of the United National Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2016, the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) Calls to Action in 2015 precipitating in federal policy shifts and the creation of social infrastructure supports. Through personal accounts from facilitators/receivers of the Centre’s programming, the Indigenous-led management of the Collection is explored. The investigation navigates the institutional processes via individual experiences. Imperatives of ethical responsibility and reciprocal engagement are used as guiding markers. The study generates conversation within and recognition for the unique model of collaborative arts management practiced within the Centre.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".