MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1524577381

Is Canada Peaceful and Safe for Aboriginal Women

2006· article· en· W1524577381 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anita Olsen Harper

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEthnologyHumanitiesCriminologySociologyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les femmes autochtones du Canada subissent de sérieuses violations des droits humains, en particulier d’un taux de violence inacceptable. Cet article décrit comment l’extrême violence raciale envers les femmes autochtones les fait disparaître et même les assassine. L’auteure a étudié le travail de la Coalition nationale pour nos sœurs enlevées qui travaille activement à dénoncer ces attaques raciales et qui appuie l’initiative des Sœurs d’esprit en aidant les familles des victimes à se familiariser avec la justice et autres systèmes analogues. Aboriginal women in Canada are the victims of very serious human rights violations. One blatant example is the legislative gap in both federal and provincial law in protecting a spouse’s right to equal division of matrimo-nial real property on-reserve. All other Canadians are

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.274 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207