MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164974752

Introduction to "Indigenous Women: The State of Our Nations"

2005· article· en· W2164974752 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bonita Lawrence, Kim Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournals @ The Mount (Mount Saint Vincent University) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMetisSovereigntyFourth WorldGender studiesGrassrootsGovernment (linguistics)State (computer science)PoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyCriminologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous W omen: The State of Our Nations originated with our desire, as co-editors, to continue a working relationship that began with the anthology Strong Women Stories: Native Vision and Survival (2003). In Strong Women Stories, the contributors addressed the range of that Aboriginal women take on as they work to ensure the survival of our communities. A number of them examined the complex legal categories through which Canada classifies Nativeness, and explored how being labelled as a C-31 Indian, or as non-status or Metis, affected their ability to feel a sense of belonging within their own and other Native communities. Other women addressed of child-rearing, schooling, sexuality, leadership, women and traditionalism, aging, violence against women and children and healing. Notably absent in these accounts, however, were articles that explicitly explored the politics of sovereignty. This absence both intrigued and troubled us, and prompted us to ask the contributors to this journal to write about Aboriginal women and As a starting point, we knew that community issues and issues have often been separated within our communities. Sovereignty issues, as articulated by the formal leadership (largely male) have addressed land claims and constitutional battles, in the courts and within government circles. Community issues, as articulated by the informal leadership (largely female), have encompassed a range of struggles, including addressing violence against women and children, alcoholism and other addictions, the health needs of children and elders, and education that is culture-based and controlled. Too often, the agendas of the formal leadership are prioritized, while the informal leadership's concerns receive secondary attention. The gender divisions that underpin whose perspectives are prioritized are obvious; what is less clear are the ways in which the gender divisions forced on us by the colonizer may have resulted in different definitions, among men and women, of sovereignty and nationhood.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations40
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournals @ The Mount (Mount Saint Vincent University)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207