MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159886080 · doi:10.5663/aps.v1i1.10134

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Urban Aboriginal Self- Determination in Canada: A Preliminary Assessment

2011· article· en· W2159886080 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Yale D. Belanger

Bibliographic record

Venueaboriginal policy studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDeclarationPoliticsCharterSelf-determinationPolitical scienceIndigenous rightsHuman rightsEconomic growthPublic administrationLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) implicitly recognizes urban Indigenous self-determination and acknowledges collective and individual Indigenous rights. This essay examines the tensions associated with the Declaration’s acknowledged Indigenous individual choice to determine political affiliation with its recognition of Indigenous collective self-determination. The purpose is to expose the complexities inherent when attempting to reconcile the Declaration with First Nations and urban Aboriginal political aspirations, Canadian court decisions, federal Indian policies, and the protective mechanisms of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The author cautions that additional studies are required probing these and other issues prior to First Nation, Aboriginal, and Canadian political leaders venturing forward in their desires to implement and activate the Declaration’s provisions to promote Indigenous community development.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0170.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueaboriginal policy studiesSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207