MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W181387665 · doi:10.29173/alr139

The Northern Territory Emergency Response: The More Things Change, The More They Stay the Same

2011· article· en· W181387665 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicole Watson

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Indigenous Peoples' Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthExpansiveVestingLawSociologyNorthern territorySettlement (finance)PaymentPolitical sciencePublic administrationEthnologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) was a raft of measures introduced by the Commonwealth of Australia in response to allegations of child sexual abuse in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities. The measures included the compulsory acquisition of Aboriginal lands, the quarantining of welfare payments, prohibitions on alcohol, and the vesting of expansive powers in the Commonwealth Minister to intervene in the affairs of Aboriginal organizations. This article aims to provide a brief historical background of Aboriginal people's experiences with the law in Australia, discuss certain provisoins of the NTER, and, finally, examine the consequences three years after the implementation of the NTER. Through this analysis, the author suggests that history remains a powerful influence, resulting in the NTER being based on assumptions of Aboriginal people that are grounded in a racist past. Further, independent studies have shown that the NTER has been largely ineffective at accomplishing its stated objectives.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207