MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888232196 · doi:10.7202/1050894ar

Presidential Address. Confronting Our Colonial Past: Reassessing Political Alliances over Canada’s Twentieth Century

2018· article· en· W2888232196 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Joan Sangster

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Historical Association · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismPoliticsGeneral partnershipContext (archaeology)IdeologyPolitical scienceAllianceGender studiesSociologyPolitical economyHistoryLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines examples of settler-initiated political alliances with Indigenous peoples in Canada over the twentieth century, placing them in their social and historical context, and assessing their insights as well as ideological and material limitations. I explore four very different examples, ranging from protests over the dispossession of land to attempts to preserve Indigenous cultures to the post-World War II organization of the Indian Eskimo Association and youth Indigenous projects associated with the Company of Young Canadians. Past settler efforts to create alliances or speak on behalf of Indigenous peoples incorporated multiple intentions and political ideas; they included both efforts at advocacy and partnership and paternal replications of colonial thinking. Assessing their complex histories is an important part of our efforts to grapple critically with Canada’s history of colonialism.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0440.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Historical AssociationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207