Le contrôle des chiens dans trois communautés du Nunavik au milieu du 20e siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le contrôle des chiens des Inuit par les autorités fédérales et provinciales au Nunavik fait l’objet d’un vif débat depuis plus d’une décennie. Depuis 1999, la Société Makivik accuse le gouvernement canadien et le gouvernement québécois d’avoir orchestré l’abattage des chiens du Nunavik dans les années 1950 et 1960 afin de favoriser l’assimilation des Inuit à la société canadienne. Pour leur part, les gouvernements d’Ottawa et de Québec ainsi que leurs corps policiers respectifs — Gendarmerie royale du Canada (GRC) et Sûreté du Québec (SQ) — nient catégoriquement avoir appliqué une politique d’élimination des chiens qui aurait eu pour objectif d’imposer un mode de vie nouveau aux Inuit. Cet article traite du contrôle des chiens au Nunavik durant cette période à partir d’événements survenus dans les communautés de Kuujjuaraapik, Puvirnituq et Kangirsujuaq.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".