Inuit understandings of space: an oral historical and GIS approach to toponyms with \nknowledge holders in Hopedale, Nunatsiavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this research is to provide resources for culturally meaningful, placebased \ncommunication of toponyms surrounding Hopedale, Nunatsiavut, including Traditional \nKnowledge and Oral History regarding these places. By interviewing Elders and Knowledge \nHolders in Hopedale and on the land, information and memories about toponyms were shared \nthat helped contribute to the creation of an interactive website and an accessible book \nsummarizing the interviews for the community. By looking beyond place names as a dot on a \nmap, a thorough and relational exploration of the history behind toponyms honours the validity \nof Indigenous ways of understanding past landscapes and encourages local archaeological \nlearning. These different understandings of place are important for the formation of Inuit identity \nand community connections in Nunatsiavut, fostering understanding that Inuit identity is \nintrinsically connected to the idea of being and becoming within a geography. A fundamental \npart of this research is to step away from Western ontologies of landscape in order to understand \nInuit history and place in a culturally relevant way.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".