MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999606456 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.19.1.5

The Sioux Hegira in Canada 1876–81: The Layering and Framing of Aboriginal Identity

2006· article· en· W1999606456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark Felton

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLayeringFraming (construction)GenealogyIdentity (music)HistorySociologyPolitical scienceArchaeologyAestheticsArtBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 4,000 Teton Sioux Indians fled north into Canada throughout the period 1876–81, following the US Army's efforts to finally destroy the cultures of the Plains Aboriginal peoples. Led primarily by the great Sitting Bull, many of these Sioux refugees claimed to be 'British Indians' and demanded the right to settle permanently in Manitoba. It fell to the newly formed Northwest Mounted Police to attempt to force the Sioux back across the border, the Canadian government ignoring their pleas to settle and instituting a harsh starvation policy to rid Canada of these unwanted guests. This article examines the Sioux hegira from the perspective of identity, considering white-ascribed Aboriginal identity labels that served to reinforce the idea of where the Sioux actually belonged, and the organic Sioux identity which the refugees altered to achieve their aims of cultural survival and settlement in Canada. Why did the Sioux alter their identity, and did this strategy lead to success or failure?

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0440.042
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207