MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734803867 · doi:10.1111/capa.12219

Implementing comprehensive land claims agreements in Canada: Towards an analytical framework

2017· article· en· W2734803867 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher Alcantara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationTreatyIndigenousFocus (optics)Political scienceLaw and economicsBusinessEnvironmental planningRegional sciencePublic administrationEnvironmental resource managementManagement scienceSociologyLawGeographyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although there is a rich literature on the negotiation and contents of comprehensive land claims agreements, very little has been written on the dynamics of their implementation. This article contributes by sketching out a framework for analyzing the interactions between Indigenous, federal, and provincial/territorial governments in the implementation of modern treaties in Canada. It finds that a useful way for conceptualizing these situations is to focus on two characteristics relating to the treaty provisions and the signatories while remaining sensitive to the effects of time and other contextual factors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207