MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132923556

Connecting Indigenous Placemakers Highlights Report

2022· other· en· W7132923556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole Latulippe, Biddy Livesey, Desna Whaanga-Schollum

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlacemakingIndigenousAotearoaWork (physics)Space (punctuation)Stewardship (theology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connecting Indigenous Placemakers was a week-long practitioners’ retreat and one-day public symposium held on Menecing, the Toronto Island (Treaty 13a). It was supported by the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN) and Ngā Aho Māori Designers’ Network. Based on the success in Aotearoa New Zealand of supporting Indigenous placemaking practitioners and shaping opportunities through a network, the 2019 gathering created a supportive space for Indigenous creatives to be on the land, work on collective and individual projects, build relationship with one another, share knowledge, and shape broader discourse on Indigenous placemaking in Toronto. As retreat participants integrated the teachings of Menecing, the Treaty Lands and Territory of the MCFN and a gathering place of many Nations, the group began referring to the project as Maanjiwe Nendamowinan, the Gathering of Minds. This co-creative experience made clear the primacy of Place (an entity with a specific identity). That is, “we don’t make place – Place makes us”. Grounded in Menecing and in dialogue with many voices, we present highlights and key themes to emerge from the gathering: Connecting with and caring for Place; Nourishment and healing; and Gathering strength.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.007

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→French-language works237,207→