Les lois de l’extension des frontières du Québec de 1898 et de 1912, la Convention de la Baie James et du Nord québécois et la Première Nation Abitibiwinni
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les lois de l’extension des frontières de 1898 et de 1912 ont défini, en bonne partie, le territoire du Québec. Des auteurs ont considéré ces lois sous l’angle des droits des Indiens, plaidant, en vertu de l’article 2 de la loi de 1912, l’obligation du Québec à cet égard. Le Québec a reconnu son obligation au moment de signer avec les Cris et les Inuits, en 1975, la Convention de la Baie James et du Nord québécois. Les Anichinabés/ Algonquins, les Attikameks et les Innus, qui habitaient aussi les territoires annexés en 1898 et en 1912, virent leurs droits éteints unilatéralement. Si la loi de 1912 servit d’argument juridique d’importance au moment de la Convention, peu d’auteurs ont cherché à replacer cet acte législatif dans son contexte. La relecture des documents de cette époque ramène au premier plan la question des droits des nations indiennes laissées de côté, comme c’est le cas pour la Première Nation Abitibiwinni.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".