MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7034794688

Wisdom of the Ages: From Houses to Monsters, the Naming Practices of the\nCoast Tsimshian Nation

2010· article· en· W7034794688 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMohawkMeaning (existential)NarrativeFocus (optics)Traditional knowledge
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to European contact, there were no written indigenous languages. Canada’s First Peoples relied on the \n‘truth’ of ancestral oral narratives passed down through thousands of years of observation, knowledge, \nwisdom and experience. The cultural practices of the Coast Tsimshian people were deeply rooted in our \nreverent relationship with nature. Place, geographic and tribal names that included clans, crests, sub-crests, \nwonders and privileges were based on this close relationship. For example, the thoughtful giving of a name \nreinforced and accelerated each person’s progress toward her/his highest destiny. As a result, at the time of \nbirth, weather patterns, the time of year and the role of the family in tribal life formed the basis for naming. \nAs it is, the widespread use of traditional indigenous names all across Canada is commonplace. 'Canada' \nitself comes from the Mohawk word, 'Kanata' meaning ‘Community.’ The central focus of the presentation \nwill be on the indigenous principles of naming that include cultural and spiritual insights, and the historical \nunderstanding of the meaning of the name at the time of bestowal.

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)0.004
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 score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0360.024
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.144 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→Same topicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology→French-language works237,207→