Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1997 Supreme Court case Delgamuukw v. British Columbia was groundbreaking in its recognition of oral histories as evidence of Aboriginal title. Brought forth by the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan nations, the trial would decide the title to territory in northern British Columbia, a jurisdiction which notably had never signed any treaties with the Canadian government. The Supreme Court overturned an earlier judgement from lower B.C. courts that had claimed Aboriginal title did not exist in law, allowing an appeal and leading to a retrial. The Supreme Court’s ruling not only defined the scope of Aborginal title, but ensured it was a constitutionally protected right that cannot be extinguished by the provinces, although it could be “infringed upon.” Additionally, it set the precedent for all future cases that Indigenous oral history must be given the same weight as written colonial history.
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 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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; 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".