MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317478435 · doi:10.1017/s0829320100007274

Les peuples américains et le système judiciaire canadien: Spéléologie d'un trou de mémoire

2002· article· en· W2317478435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rémi Savard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMistakeCredibilityMythologyEconomic JusticePoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyEthnologyCriminologyHistoryLawClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Why are First Nations overrepresented in Canadian prisons? The habitual answer is that the Canadian justice system is not adapted to Aboriginal cultures. This has given rise to various measures of adjustment, which have not, however, contributed significantly to halt the constant increase of overrepresentation. The author argues that this predicament is rather due to the lack of credibility that the Canadian justice system has in the eyes of Aboriginal peoples, given its involvement in the dismantling of Aboriginal institutions of social control since the middle of the nineteenth century. For this reason, first of all, one must dissociate oneself from certain founding myths of present-day Canada. Moreover, all must be set in motion to allow Aboriginal peoples to reappropriate their political institutions, including their own ways of administering justice. Make no mistake: it is not a question of returning to the past, but rather of moving ahead towards the future.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et SociétéSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207