MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7053075088

Visual Sovereignty and the Making of NIIPA: Tracing an Archival History of the Native Indian/Inuit Photographers' Association (1985-2005/2006)

2020· other· en· W7053075088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOCAD University Open Research Repository (OCAD University) · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMaking-ofVisionSovereigntyVisual culturePhotographyColonialismOral history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Native Indian/Inuit Photographers' Association (NIIPA, 1985-2005/2006) was a national, non-profit artist-run centre in Hamilton, Ontario, that sought to develop a community of Indigenous photographers and to promote a positive and contemporary image of Indigenous peoples through the production of a newsletter and the facilitation of annual conferences, workshops and both in-house and travelling exhibitions. This major research paper is a culmination of a year-long archival investigation of NIIPA that chronicles the organization’s history from its paternal roots in Hamilton’s Photographers’ Union to its closure in 2005/2006. Drawing on extant archival materials housed in the Toronto Reference Library and the libraries of OCAD University, the Art Gallery of Ontario, and the Royal Ontario Museum, and focusing on four of NIIPA’s main publications: Visions (1986), Silver Drum (1986), No Borders (1991), and Reminiscing (2000), the paper provides an overview of NIIPA’s two decades of activities and advocacy for Indigenous photography to demonstrate its pioneering role in Canadian photographic history as an agent of Indigenous self-determination and visual sovereignty, and to lay the groundwork for future considerations of the role NIIPA played in setting a precedent for Indigenous image-makers today.

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)0.006
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 score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0190.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOCAD University Open Research Repository (OCAD University)Same topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207