MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W288276486 · doi:10.3138/jcs.41.2.65

Cultural Renaissance or Economic Emancipation? Predictors of Support for Devolution in Nunavut

2007· article· en· W288276486 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ailsa Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmancipationVitalityDevolution (biology)PoliticsThe RenaissanceSociologyEconomic growthPolitical sciencePolitical economyHistoryLawEconomicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We know very little in Canada about Aboriginal groups’ expectations of land claims, or how they evaluate political developments after a claim. Are groups hoping for a cultural renaissance, or are they seeking the tools for economic emancipation? Three surveys of residents in Nunavut provide an unprecedented opportunity to examine residents’ expectations of the land claim, to track levels of support for the claim and the new territory, and to identify predictors of that support. The data demonstrate that, initially, residents saw devolution as a route to a cultural renaissance for Inuit but contemporary evaluations focus primarily on economic challenges. When we explore predictors of support, however, predictors of cultural vitality are better able to explain levels of support for the land claim than predictors of economic vitality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207