MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7058190957

Microplastics in the water: Indigenous storytelling as an educational method

2021· article· en· W7058190957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroplasticsIndigenousTraditional knowledgeStorytellingMainlandValue (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Western, euro-centric methodologies like the scientific method are essential for some forms of research, particularly for research in the biological realms of genetics and cell function. Using the scientific method by conducting a literature review and subsequently performing in silico experiments with simulation programs and machine learning, it has been concluded that microplastics in rivers, lakes and oceans are being consumed by aquatic wildlife, causing cellular and genetic damage, and biomagnifying up trophic levels, with evidence suggesting that microplastics have entered the human body. This is knowledge obtained by western research methods that would be relevant knowledge for Indigenous communities, based on the widespread Indigenous value that water is life. Based on the longknown Indigenous truth that Quanja Lake, and all the lakes on Manitoulin Island are connected to Lake Huron through underground channels, it is the responsible thing to inform communities of the dangers of microplastics that could be infiltrating the islands’ lakes via littering in Lake Huron from mainland Ontario. The task at hand was finding a way to deliver information obtained by western

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→