MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796498187 · doi:10.29173/alr1271

Individual Property Rights on Canadian Indian Reserves: A Review of the Jurisprudence

2005· review· en· W2796498187 on OpenAlex
Tom Flanagan, Christopher Alcantara

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeasehold estateStatutory lawPossession (linguistics)Adverse possessionJurisprudenceLawEasementStatuteProperty rightsLaw and economicsReal propertyProperty lawBusinessProperty (philosophy)Land lawLand tenurePolitical scienceEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores lite case law on individual property rights on Canadian Indian reserves. By surveying the courts' treatment of customary holdings, Certificates of Possession and the procedure for valuing leasehold reserve land, the authors find that the courts have had great difficulty in interpreting those rights that have no statutory basis or off-reserve equivalent. In contrast, the courts have been much more Consistent in interpreting those property rights that derive their authority from a statute and have similarities to off-reserve legal concepts.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.237 · 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