Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabajo trata de la nueva division administrativa en Canada, a partir de la cual surge el territorio de Nunavut en el Artico canadiense. Nunavut representa una experiencia de conciliacion de los reclamos indigenas por sus derechos ancestrales, con las instituciones de un Estado liberal democratico moderno. El autor argumenta que, mediante el federalismo presente tanto en Canada como en Mexico, es posible conciliar los derechos ancestrales de los pueblos con la democracia moderna. Primeramente traza un panorama de la situacion de los reclamos indigenas y de la reforma del federalismo en Canada, para mostrar el impasse constitucional al que estos asuntos han llegado. Para resaltar el valor de la negociacion que condujo a crear el territorio Nunavut, se hace un recuento de los ingredientes que permitieron una negociacion exitosa. Posteriormente presenta una semblanza del nuevo gobierno territorial y de sus peculiaridades dentro del esquema federal canadiense. Analiza los desafios que el nuevo gobierno debe enfrentar para hacer realidad la promesa de Nunavut. Finalmente, a manera de conclusion, aclara por que la experiencia de Nunavut puede contribuir al debate sobre el autogobierno indigena que se desarrolla actualmente en Mexico
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".