Bibliographic record
Abstract
Longitudinal research enables discussion of some of the consequences of Aboriginal organizations and identity politics for the Inuit and mixed Inuit-European peoples of Labrador. Newfoundland and Labrador Indians formed the province of Newfoundland and Labrador’s first Aboriginal organization, soon followed by a second, Inuit organization. The mixed Inuit-European “Settlers” (or Kablunângajuit) of northern Labrador initially preferred the Indian organization but were pressured to join and later would dominate the Inuit organization. Moreover, under the 2003 Inuit land claim, Kablunângajuit would legally be considered Inuit. Further south, people of similar mixed Inuit-European ancestry who long denied their Aboriginal roots would organize as Metis. Concurrent with the more than 40 years of identity politics, summarized by this paper, were major international and regional socio-economic changes that saw people move from local to distant work, creating new contexts for identity management. The paper shows how identity politics has changed relations of power and identity, has increased the numbers of people who are legally Inuit or aspire to be so, and, more generally, empowers Aboriginal people to shape their 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".