Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he post-War of 1812 relationship between Indigenous people and the Canadian state has been examined primarily through the prism of domestic federal government policy initiatives, and within this paradigm Native people have been seen principally as reacting to agendas set in Ottawa (see, for example, Dickason 1992; Miller 1989; Ray 1999). In western Canada, where British sovereignty was proclaimed much later than it was in the central and eastern regions of what has become the Canadian Dominion (and where First Nations never played the role of military ally in North American skirmishes between European powers) Native-newcomer relations have seldom been approached within the context of diplomacy And yet, diplomacy is precisely the paradigm that many Indigenous people themselves use when discussing Indigenous-Crown relations. Indeed, there exist among the Salish people of Coast and interior British Columbia several stories of one-on-one diplomatic negotiations between nineteenth- and early-twentieth century Aboriginal leaders and reigning British kings and queens. The conundrum for historians has been that there are no archival documents to corroborate the oral canon; as such, the Indigenous histories have alternatively been ignored or dismissed as either “myth” or “fantasy.” Despite their singular status, these narratives reveal much about the way Native people not only understand their relationship with the non-Native world, but also the role of newcomers within Aboriginal history. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".