Bibliographic record
Abstract
« Femmes autochtones disparues et assassinees », que se cache derriere cette expression devenue si courante au Canada ? 1200 ? 2000 ? Un nombre de cas indetermine et cependant, une interrogation demeure : que deviennent-elles ? Dans un contexte ou le modele pluriculturel canadien facilite l’accueil et l’integration des immigrants venus du monde entier, reconnait les divers particularismes culturels des populations qui vivent sur son territoire, les femmes autochtones restent la minorite raciale et sexuelle la plus severement discriminee. Sujettes a des taux de violence, de pauvrete et de vulnerabilite anormalement eleves, elles vivent dans l’ombre d’un systeme juridique inique. Ce travail de recherche s’interesse aux rapports historiques entretenus entre les populations autochtones et la societe civile canadienne. Les heritages des politiques coloniales et neocoloniales continuent de nuire aux droits humains fondamentaux de nombreuses femmes autochtones. Grâce a la mobilisation accrue des associations autochtones et feministes canadiennes, aux rapports emis par les Nations-Unies et a l’enquete nationale lancee par le gouvernement federal en 2015, le phenomene des femmes autochtones disparues et assassinees sort du silence et entraine une prise de conscience massive de la societe civile (...)
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".