Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 2010s the author became fascinated with how Indigenous protest was treated as a security issue by the Canadian state. Part of this reflected the then-Conservative government&s;s emphasis on resource extraction and how Indigenous resistance attracted the attention of key security institutions like the RCMP and the Canadian military. Pragmatism directs people&s;s attention away from metaphysical first principles and towards the practical problems of everyday life. In studying social action, two types of problems emerge: the problems confronting the subjects under study, and the problems the researcher faces in explaining social action. For pragmatists, almost anything—beliefs, rituals, art, story-telling, language—can be a tool for social action. Tools, however, do not simply pop into existence. In the author&s;s study, creativity surfaced in two key areas. The first was in the kinds of repertoires emerging from the project of reconciliation. The second kind of creativity visible here was in how public officials responded to this unease through different strategies of distancing.
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 | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.074 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".