How the Squamish Remember George Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How the Squamish Remember George VancouverThe following is an account of the Squamish's first encounter with GeorgeVancouver, as told by Squamish historian Louis Miranda (1892-1990), and presented at the Vancouver Conference on Exploration and Discovery by Chief Philip Joe V ancouver's journal records that my ancestors who greeted him 'con- ducted themselves with the greatest decorum and civility.'He certainly liked the fish given and did not mind parting with a few iron tools in exchange.Vancouver took a look around the inlet and then headed into Howe Sound where an incident occurred that you may not be so familiar with, but which has been preserved in Squamish oral tradition.As my elders tell the story, early one morning in the month called Tim-kwis-KWAS 'hot time,' an old man living near the mouth of the Squamish River had gone down to wash.As he raised his head, he saw an 'island' where no island had been before.The old man was alarmed and ran back to his house to wake his relatives.'There is an island in the sound -a floating island,' he told them.The old man knew it was an island for it had skeletons of trees thrusting skyward.But it was like no island he had ever seen.Word was sent up the Squamish River for the people to come and see the mysterious floating island.It was decided that the men would go out in their canoes to see the island.As they grew near, they saw that it wasn't a floating island at all, but a very large canoe, a strange canoe.Soon, men appeared and walked around the canoe.But what strange men they were!Every part of their body was covered except for their faces, which were white.My people scrutinized them.Finally, some of the elders came up with an explanation -these people are from the land of the dead.And they are wrapped in their burial blankets!One of the dead people stepped forward.He had smoke coming
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".