MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214608750 · doi:10.1080/17432200.2021.2018850

Walking the Law throughout the Journey of Nishiyuu

2022· article· en· W4214608750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meaghan Weatherdon

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterial Religion · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousParliamentColonialismSociologyLawCorporate governanceGender studiesMedia studiesPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous journeys are powerful exercises of law and governance. Presently, these journeys have also become a popular means for revitalizing culture and contesting continued colonialism. The Journey of Nishiyuu was a mass social movement in which a group of Uschiniichisuu, Cree youth, travelled a collective 1600 km by foot from their homes in Whapmagoostui, Québec to Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario in order to address a variety of social and environmental issues confronting Indigenous Peoples in Canada during the winter of Idle No More (2012/2013). Drawing on conversational interviews conducted with several walkers, their Elders, and community members who volunteered for the Journey of Nishiyuu, I argue that throughout the Journey the Nishiyuu youth walked the law, by which I mean they inherited their authority to govern and exercised their governance by way of walking the land. While making this argument I consider how spiritual imaginations shape legal landscapes and emphasize the itinerant nature and prevailing persistence of Indigenous legal orders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterial ReligionSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207