MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7039856806

Nickel Rush: Indigenous Testimonies and Predictions about Mining from New Caledonia and Québec

2022· article· en· W7039856806 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismVitalityNatural resourceNarrativeResource (disambiguation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise of the electric vehicle industry will be accompanied with increased mining of two former French colonies, New Caledonia and Québec, both of which have historically been a great source of nickel despite Indigenous objection to nickel extraction. This thesis juxtaposes the novels of An Antane Kapesh, of Québec, and Claudine Jacques, of New Caledonia, to understand the Indigenous perspective of historical and future events of natural resource extraction and to see how these communities are impacted. Together they reveal that mining is a gendered act of violence that much like sexual assault, continues to have negative consequences long after the initial event. Not only do toxic chemicals from mining impact the vitality of Indigenous people, but additional substances are simultaneously introduced to further weaken them physically, emotionally, and spiritually. This ultimately leads to cultural genocide, which serves to sever the bond between Indigenous people and their ancestral land, hence allowing increased access to these spaces for colonial goals. This thesis demonstrates that the narratives of Jacques and Kapesh demand a revaluation of the intentions of self-proclaiming “green” and “Indigenous friendly” corporations, such as Tesla, as the great nickel rush of the twenty-first century commences. Advisor: Julia Frengs

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)0.002
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln (University of Nebraska)Same topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207