Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines transnational movements at the northern border in 1838, a pivotal year in United States, British, and indigenous relations. In that year, the Upper and Lower Canada Rebellions were launched from Maine to Detroit as an attempt by local people on both sides of the border to over throw a small cadre of British elites who dominated a conservative political machine. That same year, Potawatomi of the southern Great Lakes who had traditionally freely crossed the border due to treaty arrangements negotiated at the end of the eighteenth century, utilized these transnational options to flee forced removal by the U.S. government. Similarly, indigenized French, individuals who were the products of over a century of integration into Native communities, were migrating away from these communities as British Indian agents attempted to protect indigenous homelands. At Detroit, a key location for migrating Potawatomi and other Anishinaabe, the movements of these three groups came together, dislocating and relocating families, and at times breaking out into armed conflict that threatened a British/American neutrality agreement. Detroit’s location at the apex of the indigenous buffer zone made the performance of indigeneity a crucial means to negotiate and sometimes thwart the agendas of the two Euro-American nations. Of the three groups, Potawatomi were most successful in maintaining their communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".