MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231400736 · doi:10.24124/2005/bpgub431

The Edmonton and District Stragglers: gendered strategies of treaty and scrip, 1876-1886

2005· dissertation· en· W4231400736 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Melanie Ann Niemi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsBureaucracyTreatyGovernment (linguistics)Ethnic groupMetisPseudonymPublic administrationPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metis women listed as Edmonton and District Stragglers made strategic familial and economic decisions during the treaty and scrip period of the nineteenth century. In so doing, they influenced the development and administration of the Canadian government's treaty and scrip policies. Department of Indian Affairs Inspector Thomas Wadsworth created the straggler classification as an expedient solution to a bureaucratic problem -a way to pay people who, by not belonging to an Indian band, were behaving in a way policy makers had not anticipated. The deconstruction of ethnic and band categories reveals that aboriginal women used administrative categories, including 'straggler,' 'Indian,' and 'halfbreed,' in ways unexpected by government authorities. The ways women used these categories of rule had long-term implications. Their decisions influenced their descendants' ethnic identities. Furthermore, official policy was far different from practice. When individuals responded differently than expected, new administrative categories and policies were created to accommodate for the discrepancies between expected and actual responses.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→