MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1812952082 · doi:10.24124/c677/200857

Transitional Identities: Negotiating Social Transitions in the Pacific NW 1825-1860s

2008· article· en· W1812952082 on OpenAlex
Lisa Phillips

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonyJurisdictionNegotiationSovereigntyImmigrationPopulationPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyLawDemographyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When one studies a specific society, hegemonic practice is so deeply rooted that it is often difficult to study it from outside that system. However, there are periods of dramatic social change when ongoing social practice in a geographic space is disrupted. On such occasions hegemonic forces can be seen, as it were, from outside of assumed practice. The northwest coast of North America provides such an opportunity. From 1818 to 1846, the British and American states shared jurisdiction over the territory with sovereignty under constant negotiation. The Hudson’s Bay Company established a substantial commercial presence in the region from the 1820s to 1850s. During the 1830s and 1840s, massive immigration from the eastern United States shifted the population balance to favour those with ties to the United States. The imposition of the border across the northwest in 1846 marked a significant watershed in the evolution of social control in the region.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.256 · 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