MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reframing Indigenous Territories: Private Property, Human Rights and Overlapping Claims

2014· article· en· W1199907583 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brian Thom

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Indian Culture and Research Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCognitive reframingTreatyHuman rightsCommissionGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceTerritorialityIndigenous rightsState (computer science)Property rightsIntellectual propertyLawLaw and economicsSociologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the implications of the powerful "overlapping territories" map produced by the government of Canada in its attempt to refute human rights violations charges brought by Hul'qumi'num Treaty Group at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The map is at the core of Canada's defense in that it suggests that overlapping indigenous territories negate claims of exclusivity over the land and therefore any kind of obligations the state may have in respect of human or other indigenous rights in those lands. Revealing the limits of cartographic abstractions of indigenous spatialities, as well as the perilous stakes for indigenous peoples when engaging in conventional discourses of territoriality, these issues have broad significance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0350.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Indian Culture and Research JournalSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207