The Social Contribution of the Canadian Rangers: A Tool of Assimilation or Means of Agency ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Rangers is a subcomponent of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) reserve deployed in remote areas of Canada. Canadian Rangers’ patrols are composed mainly of indigenous under the responsibility of non-indigenous instructors. This close association of indigenous people with a non-indigenous military force raises the questions of assimilation and agency. How do patrols’ members describe the Canadian Rangers? Do elements of assimilation or of agency transpires from their discourse? This paper is based on an inductive analysis of twenty interviews and observations conducted in 2016 in Quebec. Two central themes can be identified in the data. First, phrases, or part of phrases, pointing towards the identification of assimilation were identified. Yet these elements refer to the assimilation – albeit limited – of instructors rather than Inuit. Second, elements referring to a positive contribution to Inuit agency were identified. These elements further explain the active support of Inuit for the subcomponent.
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 | 0.011 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".