Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lecture Series Description: Who are the Metis? Are they a mixed-raced people or a distinct Indigenous nation? The Metis are in fact a postcontact, aboriginal community that emerged from the economic synergy between different fur trading companies and Indigenous peoples in Central and Western Canada (17th to 19th centuries). Initially the children of European men and Indigenous women, the Metis quickly became a distinct nation with distinguishing cultural expressions, political organization, and social frameworks. However, today more than ever, the Metis remain an enigma to Canadian governmental agencies as well as to the general public. Over six weeks, this lecture series will rectify misperceptions of Metis identity by focusing on three elements: 1) reviewing the historical rise of the Metis nation (17th to the 19th centuries); 2) outlining the impact of Canadian colonial policies on Metis people (late 19th to 20th centuries); and 3) discussing the current realities of Metis identity politics both with the federal government and within the communities. This lecture series will provide a grounded and contemporary understanding of a longstanding and vibrant aboriginal community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".