MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3107034438 · doi:10.14288/1.0391942

Northern Saulteaux also known as “Ojibwa”

2020· article· en· W3107034438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily Pitek

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ojibwa are comprised of “numerous communities ranging mainly from southern and northwestern Ontario, northern Michigan and central Manitoba and Saskatchewan (Brown and Beierle, 2000).” The term “Ojibwa” describes a larger ethnic and linguistic group that is not politically unified. Historically, Ojibwa contact with Europeans began in the 1640’s with the arrival of fur traders and French Jesuit missionaries. The 1800’s brought an end to treaties and marked the Ojibwa relocations to reservations, occurring after the War of 1812 in the United States, and after the establishment of the Dominion Government in 1867 in Canada (Hallowell, 1955:117). This entry focuses specifically on the Northern Saulteaux (around the time of 1930), an Ojibwa people who migrated to the more remote area east of Lake Winnipeg. In part, this migration helped the Northern Saulteaux to “conserve a great deal of their aboriginal culture during a period when armed conflicts with an expanding white population, the effects of the fur trade, and Christianization led to more rapid culture changes among the Ojibwa elsewhere (Hallowell, 1955:112).” This entry primarily utilizes ethnographic information obtained by Alfred Irving Hallowell (the principal ethnographic authority), who completed field work among the Northern Saulteaux from 1930-1940. At this time, the Saulteaux had had contact with Christian missionaries, but native religious beliefs were still held. These native beliefs include several supernatural entities such as ancestral spirits and other non-human beings. Ethnographers have referred to Saulteaux religious practitioners as shamans, medicine men, or conjurers. These individuals had supernatural abilities (often acquired in a religious fast/dream state) including the ability to access knowledge from and communicate with people far away, foretell the future, communicate with supernatural beings and the dead, and solve mysteries. Additionally, these shamans had the power to abduct souls, causing sickness, mental distress, and death. Due to these supernatural abilities, as well as their knowledge and skill, shamans held effective leadership roles (despite the absence of an official political office and official religious leaders). Because religion does not exist in a distinct sphere, but rather pervades all aspects of life, this entry considers the religious group to be coterminous with the society itself.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.152 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies→French-language works237,207→