On the Margins: Aboriginal Realities and ‘White Man’s Research’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the 2011 census, Aboriginal Canadians constitute 4% of the population of Canada (Statistics Canada, 2013). It is a relatively young population, with the average age being 27 years for Aboriginal Canadians as compared to 40 years for non-Aboriginal Canadians. Although ‘Aboriginal’ is the official Canadian term, many indigenous communities prefer terms based on self-governance, of which there are three main groups: the First Nations who are scattered throughout the country, the Inuit who are primarily based in the Arctic and the Métis people, who are of mixed — European (mostly French) and Aboriginal — ancestry. It is widely accepted that one commonality across Aboriginal peoples is their history of colonisation. Part of this history involved the systematic extinction of ‘Indianness’ and policies of ‘aggressive assimilation’. These policies were executed, among others, by ‘negotiating’ treaties that forced indigenous people to live on isolated, often remote, plots of land: the reserves. For most, this way of living brought an end to their traditional nomadic existence. Often reserves were too barren for farming, and if conditions were favourable, farming was not allowed so that Aboriginal people had to buy food and goods from Western settlers. Cultural and spiritual practices such as the potlatch exchange (a ritual involving the gifting of goods to guests) of the Pacific coast communities were also outlawed, but due to the perseverance of many elders some of these ceremonies have managed to survive. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.047 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".