Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il est souvent question, dans les documents gouvernementaux, dans les dossiers juridiques et dans les médias, de « chevauchements » entre les territoires des Premières Nations et particulièrement, au Québec, entre les territoires des Algonquiens vivant au nord du Saint-Laurent : Cris, Naskapis, Innus, Atikamekw, Algonquins. À la lumière de ce qu’en ont dit les observateurs depuis le xvii e siècle, cet article explore la notion de frontière, tant entre les territoires des nations algonquiennes qu’entre ceux des bandes et/ou communautés et des familles de ces différentes nations. Ces frontières ont-elles existé? Si oui, de quelle nature étaient-elles et comment s’est construite la notion de « chevauchement » qui perturbe aujourd’hui les relations entre les nations algonquiennes et entre les membres de chacune d’elles ? Ce texte s’inscrit dans la réflexion menée, à l’intérieur du programme « Peuples autochtones et gouvernance », par Étienne Le Roy, Jacques Leroux et Sylvie Vincent sur les représentations d’espace et les droits territoriaux.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".