Questions of Privacy and Confidentiality after Atrocity: Collecting and Retaining Records of the Residential School System in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Record collection and record preservation have direct consequences for survivors and often determine the efficacy of the production of genocide memory. Currently, there are increased restrictions that limit our access to evidence and threaten long-term preservation of records. This article will focus on the recent decision to permanently destroy Independent Assessment Process files within fifteen years. These records contain personal disclosures of serious abuses and their destruction reflects an uneasy precedent with record conservation. While institutions strive to protect the privacy and safety of survivors and respect the use of their information, there are concerns that the state, churches and organizations obscure memory through the use or misuses of records or use the terms of privacy to protect themselves. This paper will draw on examples of conflicts within access, privacy, respect, and memory that inevitably contribute or detract from efforts in reconciliation or transitional justice.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it