Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landscape is a part of every individual’s sense of being. However, one cannot deny the special relationships that Indigenous peoples maintain with places they have inhabited since the beginning of creation. These places are deeply imbued with meaning, and are sites of personal and community identity. In addition, these places are legal in nature. They teach Indigenous people about their legal obligations – to each other, their ancestors and the natural world. This paper examines the connection between land and law for the Hul’qumi’num Mustimuhw, a group of Island Hul’qumi’num speaking First Nations, located on southeastern Vancouver Island. It discusses how lands within Indigenous territories can be transformed into legal landscapes, when considered in relation to place, time and experience. It also examines specific legal landscapes within the Hul’qumi’num territory and explores the laws and regulations that reside within and flow from them. Through this paper, one can gain insight into how these places inform the Hul’qumi’num lgal tradition and impart important teachings to the Hul’qumi’num Mustimuhw about the nature of their relationship and their obligations to particular places and inhabitants of those places.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".