MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183094271 · doi:10.3138/chr-102-s1-005

The Half-Breed “Rising” of 1875

2021· article· en· W3183094271 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
George F. G. Stanley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)Settlement (finance)Government (linguistics)LawGovernorPolitical scienceHistoryEngineeringPhilosophyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In July 1875, the Hon. Alexander Morris, lieutenant-governor of Manitoba and the north-west, received a letter from Lawrence Clarke, the Hudson’s Bay Company factor at Fort Carlton, informing him that a serious state of affairs had arisen on the south branch of the Saskatchewan and strongly pressing for a detachment of the mounted police. This letter mentioned the establishment of a permanent half-breed settlement at St. Laurent and stated that the half-breeds had “assumed to themselves the right to enact laws, rules and regulations for the Government of the Colony and adjoining country of a most tyrannical nature, which the minority of the settlers are perforce bound to obey or be treated with criminal severity.” The “president” of this government was Gabriel Dumont, who was alleged to have coerced various “freemen” and Indians on the plains by seizing the property of, and levying fines upon, those who refused to acknowledge his authority. The letter continued with a statement that the Indians, too, were assuming a hostile attitude and urged that “unless we have a certain protective force stationed at or near Carlton, the ensuing Winter, I cannot answer for the result, serious difficulties will assuredly arise and life and property be endangered.”

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207