MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1691322644

Re-appraising Canada's Northern "Internal Colonies"

2009· article· en· W1691322644 on OpenAlex
Andrew P. Hodgkins

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthern review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevolution (biology)DevelopmentalismUnderdevelopmentColonialismSociologyIdentity (music)PostmodernismPolitical economyFordismNeoclassical economicsPolitical sciencePoliticsEconomicsEconomyEpistemologyLawAestheticsAnthropology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines application of the term to Canada's northern territories by comparing two general theories commonly used in the development literature: dependency theories of development and post-developmentalism. These theories employ different assumptions regarding causes for regional underdevelopment, and consequently arrive at different conclusions. While the former takes trade as its starting point of analysis, the latter has been used to focus on local forms of development, culture, and identity. The article begins by outlining both theories in relation to internal colonialism and follows the paradigmatic shift from the Marxian employment of the term to the postmodern turn in the social sciences. Drawing upon historical and contemporary events occurring in the North, the comparison provides an opportunity to make conjectures that class divisions are forming in the post-colonial aftermath of land claims, self-government, and devolution of power and control over resource revenues generated from megaproject developments.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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