Discours de la présidente. Confronter notre passé colonial : une réévaluation des alliances politiques au Canada à travers le XXe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine des exemples d’alliances politiques initiées par les colons avec les Premières nations du Canada au cours du XXe siècle, en les replaçant dans leurs contextes sociaux et historiques, et en évaluant leurs conceptions ainsi que leurs limites idéologiques et matérielles. Je considère quatre exemples très différents, allant des protestations contre la mainmise sur les terres et des tentatives de préserver les cultures autochtones, jusqu’à l’Indian Eskimo Association de l’après-Seconde Guerre mondiale et les projets des Jeunes Autochtones associés à la Compagnie des jeunes Canadiens. Par le passé, les efforts des colons de nouer des alliances ou de parler au nom des Peuples autochtones recouvraient de multiples intentions et idées politiques, incluant autant des efforts de plaidoyer et de partenariat qu’une reproduction paternaliste de la pensée colonialiste. L’évaluation de ces histoires complexes représente une partie importante de nos tentatives de nous confronter de manière critique à l’histoire du colonialisme au Canada.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".