MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385747115 · doi:10.59962/9780774815161-002

Preface to the Second Edition

2009· book-chapter· en· W4385747115 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyCognitive scienceHistoryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the original manuscript for Treaty Talks in British Columbia was being prepared in the summer of 1995, the treaty-making process was still in its infancy but gaining considerable public attention -not only in British Columbia, but in Canada in general.All of the First Nations in British Columbia who had signalled their intention to conclude a treaty with the federal and provincial governments were in the initial stages of the process, with only a handful at the Framework Agreement stage.This was just prior to substantive negotiations, wherein the initial and rather general bargaining positions of the parties would be clarified, along with a number of issues subject to the subsequent negotiations.At the time, the objective of this book was to offer the public a primer in order to develop a more informed perspective on how the province arrived at this point in its relations with its original inhabitants.While this objective remains valid in the second edition of the book, almost five years have passed since the writing of the original manuscript, and many rather significant events affecting the talks have occurred in that time.Granted, much attention has been devoted to these events in the press, in various academic forums, and in the strategic planning sessions of affected public and private interests.Yet none of these sources provides a complete picture of the events that characterize the talks from their inception.As a result, in the last chapter of this second edition (Chapter 6, "The Treaty-Making Process, 1996-2000"), some of the most important events to arise from the treaty talks during the latter half of the 1990s and into 2000 are discussed.The new chapter opens with an overview of the Supreme Court of Canada's 1997 ruling in Delgamuukw.Subsequently, the chapter examines the impact of the decision on Native bargaining power (vis-à-vis the federal and provincial governments) and the manner in which the ruling induced both orders of government to undertake new policy initiatives in response to the

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3910.246

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks→Same topicPolitical Systems and Governance→French-language works237,207→