Food Production in the Wabigoon Basin: The First Nine Thousand Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This local history of the Wabigoon Basin surveys food security in the region over the longue durée: from the retreat of the glaciers until the imposition of the Indian Act and industrialization in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Synthesizing local history and ethnohistory with recent archaeological and anthropological readings of landscapes managed by Indigenous peoples as anthropogenic spaces, we aim to critique traditional nineteenth-century historiography that saw Canadian landscapes (especially the Canadian Shield) as untouched wilderness before Euro-Canadian agriculture. Here, we use colonization in the 1890s not as a beginning point for history but, rather, as an end point for nine thousand years of Indigenous peoples’ food sovereignty, unhindered by bureaucracy and third-party management. We also discuss the conceptual gap between the reality of Indigenous (specifically Ojibwe/Anishinaabeg) farming food production and farming in the Dryden-Wabigoon and Boundary Waters region, within their long history of innovation and adaptation versus Euro-Canadian fantasies of Indigenous stasis and unpopulated wilderness used to justify late-19th-century colonization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".