Old Wine in New Bottles?: Instrumental Policy Learning and the Evolution of the Certainty Provision in Comprehensive Land Claims Agreements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les accords en matière de revendications territoriales globales sont des outils importants pour renforcer l’autonomie des peuples autochtones. La disposition relative à la certitude, qui traite de la nature des droits et des titres ancestraux des Autochtones une fois un traité signé, est un aspect essentiel de ces traités. Jusqu’en 1986, la Couronne a favorisé l’utilisation d’une seule formule relative à la certitude dans la négociation de tous les traités ; mais, après 1986, des groupes autochtones ont pu négocier des variantes de cette formule. Dans cet article, je tente d’expliquer pourquoi ce changement s’est produit. Je suggere ainsi que c’est devant l’échec de sa politique, engendrée par l’opposition des Autochtones à la clause d’extinction, que la Couronne a du revoir cette politique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".