MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156806238 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.07118

Indigenous rights, peoples, and space exploration: A response to the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) Consulting Canadians on a framework for future space exploration activities

2021· preprint· en· W3156806238 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hilding R. Neilson, Elena Cirkovic

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousSpace (punctuation)Agency (philosophy)Space explorationNarrativePolitical scienceSpace lawOuter spacePlan (archaeology)Public administrationLawEnvironmental ethicsSociologyGeographyEngineeringSocial scienceArchaeologyComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is beginning to plan its next chapter of space exploration that includes sending humans back to the Moon and onwards to Mars. This includes understanding humanities place in space and who will benefit from our exploration. As part of this plan the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) placed a call for consultations. In response, we presented comments urging the CSA to be inclusive of Indigenous peoples in the planning as well as to be inclusive of Indigenous rights and worldview in the future of space exploration. In particular, we explore the questions of how Outer Space Laws intersect with treaties between Indigenous Nations and the Crown in what is today Canada, how the current narratives of space exploration parallel the historic narratives of colonization that negatively impact Indigenous peoples, and how the future of commercial exploitation of outer space acts to further colonization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSpace exploration and regulationFrench-language works237,207