Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1763 King George III of Great Britain, victorious in the Seven Years War with France, issued a proclamation to organize the governance of territory newly acquired by the Crown in North America and the Caribbean. The proclamation reserved land west of the Appalachian Mountains for Indians, and required the Crown to purchase Indian land through treaties, negotiated without coercion and in public, before issuing rights to newcomers to use and settle on the land. Marking its 250th anniversary Keeping Promises shows how central the application of the Proclamation is to the many treaties that followed it and the settlement and development of Canada. Promises have been made to Aboriginal peoples in historic treaties from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries in Ontario, the Prairies, and the Mackenzie Valley, and in modern treaties from the 1970s onward, primarily in the North. In this collection, essays by historians, lawyers, treaty negotiators, and Aboriginal leaders explore how and how well these treaties are executed. Addresses by the governor general of Canada and the federal minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development are also included. In 2003 Aboriginal leaders formed the Land Claims Agreements Coalition to make sure that treaties - building blocks of Canada - are fully implemented. Unique in breadth and scope, Keeping Promises is a testament to the research, advocacy, solidarity, and accomplishments of this coalition and those holding the Crown to its commitments.
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 | 0.011 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.013 |
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".