MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7130934525 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18733643

Integrating Indigenous Knowledge Systems into AI Development in West Africa

2001· article· en· W7130934525 on OpenAlexaff
Hamed Al-Ghulini, Sayed Al-Saif, Fahd Al-Muhannan, Ahmed El-Dinah

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousTraditional knowledgeStakeholderEmpirical researchTheme (computing)Empirical evidenceKnowledge integration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) into Artificial Intelligence (AI) development in West Africa is a nascent but crucial area of research with significant potential for socio-economic impact. A comprehensive search strategy was employed using academic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The review included studies published between and that examined AI development practices in conjunction with IKS. The findings indicate a growing interest but limited empirical evidence on the integration of IKS into AI models, particularly regarding the effectiveness of such integrations in enhancing model accuracy and cultural relevance. A notable theme is the need for culturally adapted machine learning algorithms to ensure ethical compliance and acceptance among local communities. While there is nascent research indicating potential benefits from integrating IKS into AI development, more empirical studies are needed to substantiate these claims with robust methodologies that account for contextual factors such as cultural nuances and societal impact. Further research should prioritise culturally informed machine learning algorithms and incorporate stakeholder perspectives in the development process. Policy makers should also consider frameworks for promoting IKS integration into AI systems, ensuring they are aligned with ethical standards and public acceptance. Model estimation used $\hat{\theta}=argmin_{\theta}\sum_i\ell(y_i,f_\theta(x_i))+\lambda\lVert\theta\rVert_2^2$, with performance evaluated using out-of-sample error.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.196 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207