MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122038714

The Caledonia Land Dispute

2009· article· en· W2122038714 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Illusha Nokhrin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNew Caledonia Indigenous Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeedTreatyPolitical scienceNegotiationDispute resolutionDispute mechanismGovernment (linguistics)LawAlternative dispute resolutionGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beginning with colonial invasion and emerging out of hundreds of years of negotiations and treaties, the Caledonia land dispute was one of the largest and most publicized Native land claims disputes in Canada. In this brief paper, I analyze the history behind the land around which the dispute was centered and give an overview of the Treaty of Nanfan and the Haldimand Deed. I then provide a succinct overview of how the present-day dispute emerged before offering some suggestions as to how the dispute could be resolved, ultimately arguing for a new set of legal documents, drafted by First Nations members, residents of Caledonia and government officials, which would supersede the existing legal documents concerning the area and establish a new framework for rights 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNew Caledonia Indigenous StudiesFrench-language works237,207