MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030705185 · doi:10.1215/00141801-2007-045

Women “Living across the Line”: Intermarriage on the Canadian Prairies and in Southern New Zealand, 1870–1900

2008· article· en· W2030705185 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angela Wanhalla

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnohistory · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelocationHuman settlementIndigenousGeographyNature reserveEthnologySettlement (finance)Space (punctuation)Period (music)HistoryArchaeologyEcologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the late nineteenth century reserve lines and boundaries were sharply drawn in Canada and New Zealand, and, as a consequence, the choice to marry “out” had very real material implications for aboriginal women. This article examines the “reserve experience” of indigenous women in Canada and New Zealand, focusing on the native reserve as a significant site of interracial contact. Native reserves were designed to be distinct settlements, but intermarriage undermined the pretense of separate living spaces that reserves were designed to generate. Intermarriage, and the spatial relocation that followed, are significant components of the reserve experience for indigenous women over the period 1870 to 1900. Understanding of the reserve experience requires reorientation to account for spatial movement and migration, viewing the reserve not just as a bounded space, but also as a site where border crossings and resistances took place and where interracial relationships flourished.

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)0.002
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnohistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207