Bibliographic record
Abstract
Older Indigenous people are in a unique position within what is now Canada. With relationships to place that extend over millennia and shape the ways that communities are structured, as well as the ongoing challenges and oppressions of living within a colonial society that regulates much of everyday life and limits opportunities in many Indigenous communities, aging for Indigenous individuals has multiple layers of complexity that involve both opportunities and challenges, and that relate closely to the places in which people live. ‘Indigenous peoples’ is an umbrella term, used internationally to refer to the original peoples of a place. In Canada, ‘Indigenous peoples’ include over 70 distinct language groups and hundreds of different nations (Statistics Canada, 2017). In Canada, the Constitution Act recognizes three main Indigenous groups: First Nations, Métis, and Inuit (Government of Canada, 1982), although each of these groups masks a huge amount of diversity, and Indigenous peoples generally prefer to be identified by nation, such as Cree, Mi’kmaq, or Omàmìwinninì – rather than as part of these larger groupings. The 2016 Census counted 1,673,785 Indigenous people in Canada, a number that grew by 42.5% since 2006, and Indigenous peoples now make up at least 4.9% of the overall population of Canada (Statistics Canada, 2017). While the Indigenous population in general is younger than non-Indigenous populations in Canada, the proportion of Indigenous people aged 65 years or older is also increasing more quickly than in other populations, rising from 4.8% in 2006 to 7.3% in 2016 (Wilson et al, 2010, 2011; Statistics Canada, 2017) (Figure 16.1).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 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".