MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210713976 · doi:10.18584/iipj.2021.12.4.13707

COVID-19 Pandemic: Invoking the Famine and Pestilence Clause to be Paired with the Medicine Chest Clause from the Numbered Treaties

2021· article· en· W3210713976 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carrie Bourassa, Danette Starblanket, Jennifer N. Langan, Mikayla Hagel, Sadie Anderson, Marlin Legare, Meghan Chapados

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Indigenous Policy Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyObligationIndigenousJurisdictionFamineLawPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)LinguisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treaty-based strategies are required to address the unique needs of Indigenous communities in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. A treaty-based approach should recognize provisions within the Numbered Treaties, including the Famine and Pestilence Clause and Medicine Chest Clause, agreed to during the signing of Treaty 6 in 1876. The Famine and Pestilence Clause established the Crown’s obligation to aid Indigenous Peoples within Treaty 6 Territory in the event of calamities such as locust raids, storms, starvation, and disease. The Medicine Chest Clause instituted the means through which the Crown would provide medical care for Indigenous Peoples within the jurisdiction. The Government of Canada has a legal obligation to invoke the Famine and Pestilence Clause and Medicine Chest Clause in a strategy to address the spread of COVID-19 in Indigenous communities.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0130.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Indigenous Policy JournalSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207