Towards a definition of a healthy urban Aboriginal community in Winnipeg : urban Aboriginal perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Table of Contents: ' healthy communilie s movement?'When these questions are answered it may be possible to use this knowledge to assist planners in moving beyond mainstream Westem rationalist definitions of urban Aboriginal communities.Depending on the results, it may also be possible to use this knowledge to help inform future urban Aboriginal planning needs fol Winnipeg's t1Aboriginal communities.In addition, the planning knowledge gained may be in some part transferable to other large urban centres in Canada that are experiencing significant increases in Aboriginal peoples residing within their borders.1.3 Significance of Proposed Research This project has the potential to contribute to the scholarly planning knowledge.Although there is considerable literature on the healthy communities concept (Hancock and Duhl, 1988; Boothroyd and Eberle,1990; wifty, 1998; Fitzpatrick and LaGory,2000; de Leeuw, 2001; Ontario Healthy Communities Coalition,2006), there is little with a specif,rc focus on urban Aboriginal communities.The potential knowledge that can be gained may be very useful considering the growing importance of Aboriginal peoples as key members of Canadian cities in the present and especially for the future.Keeping with the principles of community planning, it is important for urban Aboriginal peoples to define, from their experiences, what they envision as their healthy urban community so that this vision can help to motivate and guide the community-building process.From a professional practice context, this vision of a healthy community can help guide plamers to shape long-term planning efforts with urban Aboriginal peoples.This project has the potential to make it clear to all planners that traditional rational- comprehensive planning is not a successful paradigm for planning with Aboriginal peoples in general and in the urban setting in particular.By conceptualizing the idea of a healthy urban Aboriginal community next to the 'Healthy Communities Movement' there ' healthy communities movement?'This is an important topic for two reasons: first, Aboriginal peoples are younger and growing at a faster rate than non-aboriginal population groups in many major urban centres, including Winnipeg.This leads to the logical conclusion that they will have an
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".