MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944589719

Linguistic Rights of Minorities and Indigenous Communities

2019· article· en· W2944589719 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mauro Mazza

Bibliographic record

VenueAisberg (University of Bergamo) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMinority Rights and Languages
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousLinguistic diversityPolitical scienceSociologyLinguisticsEthnologyGender studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essay examines the legal status of linguistic groups in Canada, comparing them with other experiences especially of common law countries (Australia, New Zealand and Unites States). Both the English and French-speaking linguistic communities and the Aboriginal communities are analysed. Special attention is given to issues concerning education in English and French. For the Aboriginal communities, the experiences of Nunavut and Nisga’a are examined as paradigmatic cases. Finally, the teachings that the Canadian experience, also in comparison with the Italian case, can offer on the comparative level are highlighted.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAisberg (University of Bergamo)Same topicMinority Rights and LanguagesFrench-language works237,207