MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485013561 · doi:10.3138/jcs.43.2.23

Le Nunavut : entre le rêve et la réalité Bilan de dix années d’autonomie gouvernementale inuite et prospective socio-économique

2009· article· fr· W1485013561 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
André Légaré

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le 1er avril 2009, le gouvernement du Nunavut a fêté son dixième anniversaire d’existence. La naissance du Nunavut fut le résultat de plus de 20 ans de négociations entre le gouvernement fédéral du Canada et les Inuits de l’Arctique de l’est. L’un des objectifs visé par la création du gouvernement du Nunavut fut de permettre au peuple inuit de contrôler son programme politique afin de mieux gérer les défis socio-économiques de la société inuite à l’approche du 21ième siècle. Toutefois, après dix ans d’existence du gouvernement, force est de constater que le bilan de la situation socio-économique est plutôt sombre. Néanmoins, tous les espoirs ne sont pas perdus. Le Nunavut bénéficie de la plus forte croissance économique annuelle au Canada; de plus, certaines initiatives prises récemment par le gouvernement du Nunavut, dont notamment la réforme scolaire, la construction de logements sociaux supplémentaires, la mise en œuvre d’une loi visant à protéger la langue inuite, nous porte à croire que le Nunavut pourra prendre un virage positif à plus long terme. En somme, le Nunavut est encore jeune; il devra apprendre à grandir en affrontant ses défis socio-économiques

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207