Indigenous Resistance at Expo 67: A Case Study on the Indians of Canada Pavilion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expo 67 presented Montreal to the world as a progressive city, emblematic of all of the peace, innovation, technology and movement encapsulated by the theme "Man and his World" and the general spirit of comradery compared to past World’s Fairs. In spite of this image, two 2 years later the federal government would release the contentious White Paper of Trudeau’s liberal government which erased treaty rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada under the guise of assimilation into a multicultural Canadian society, the rhetoric of which is still being fought against today. The photograph I focus on in my paper shows the Indians of Canada pavilion 3 with Queen Elizabeth the II in the foreground, taken by Meredith Dixon at Expo 67. Ruth Phillips argues that the Indians of Canada Pavilion attempted to balance the "value of cultural difference" against "the survival of traditional values." Meanwhile Cécile Cadela-Laborde 4 posits that the pavilion represented a gesture of colonialism because of its tokenistic representations and the lack of decision-making power given to Indigenous artists involved. [...]
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".