MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1606494653

Personne ne connaît son nom : Klatsassin et la guerre de Chilcotin

2008· article· fr· W1606494653 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John E. Lutz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au lever du jour, le 30 avril 1864, quelque 25 Tsilhqot'ins ont pris par surprise des hommes qui dormaient dans un campement. Ces hommes travaillaient a la construction d'une route vers les mines d'or de Cariboo. Seulement trois des quinze travailleurs ont survecu et ont pu s'echapper. Est-ce que cette attaque etait gratuite ou etait-ce une vengeance? Etait-ce un acte de terrorisme ou de guerre, ou etait-ce le pire massacre de Blancs par des autochtones de l'histoire de la Colombie-Britannique? Qui etait le chef et, s'il s'agissait d'une guerre, qui a gagne?

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndigenous Cultures and HistoryFrench-language works237,207