MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“Assaulting the Ears of Government”

2017· book· en· W4252700067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aroha Harris, Mary McCallum

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Illinois Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueIndigenousPoliticsPolitical scienceMohawkPublic administrationGovernment (linguistics)ConventionFormative assessmentState (computer science)WelfareGeographyGender studiesLibrary scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the summer of 1945, Indian Homemakers' Clubs from southern Ontario congregated in Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory for their first annual convention. The gathering marked eight years of the Clubs' existence in Canada and signaled a significant era of First Nations women's cultural and political activity. Six years later in September 1951, some 300 Maori women gathered in Wellington, New Zealand, to attend the inaugural conference of the Maori Women's Welfare League. Focusing on the formative years of the Clubs and the League (the late 1930s to the 1960s), this chapter explores some of the key activities of the two organizations. In addition to local activities, each organization coordinated efforts on a broader scale, including developing their constitutions and hosting regional conventions in Canada and national conferences in New Zealand. At all levels, members organized activities and discussion that reflected the priorities of the groups themselves including their concerns about the state. The analysis of the constitutions and meetings shows that indigenous women were active participants in workable (though often strained) relationships with the Departments of Indian and Maori Affairs.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0250.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Illinois Press eBooksSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207