MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378647628 · doi:10.22584/nr54.2023.011

Métis Commercial Fishing: A Legal and Historical Overview of Métis Involvement in the Commercial Fishing Industry

2023· article· en· W4378647628 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ken Coates, Myles Ferguson, Thea Pearce, Gregory T. Finnegan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Northern Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanYukon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingFishing industrySupreme courtFisheryNegotiationCommercial fishingFish <Actinopterygii>Political scienceBusinessLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Métis freshwater, or inland, fishery has been a contentious issue in the Canadian courts for decades, with little progress from the Métis perspective. This report begins by documenting the long history of the Métis as commercial fishers through their employment contracts with the Hudson’s Bay Company (1823–1888), and then discusses the challenges the Métis have faced in acquiring rights to a commercial fishery through numerous legal cases since the 1993 Supreme Court of Canada decision R v. Powley. A pathway to resolving the Métis commercial fisheries impasse is probably best found at the negotiation table between Canada, the provinces, and the Métis Nations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Northern ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207