MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385867905 · doi:10.59962/9780774855778-001

Preface

2008· book-chapter· en· W4385867905 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Peoples' Rights and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous legal traditions have a long and rich history in North America, stretching back hundreds, if not thousands of years.Living together in societies long before the arrival of the first Europeans, Aboriginal peoples developed complex systems of law based on social, spiritual, and political values expressed through the teachings of knowledgeable and respected individuals and elders.Enunciated in rich stories, ceremonies, and traditions within Native communities, Indigenous legal systems represent the accumulated wisdom and experience of Aboriginal peoples.Because these were ignored, banned, or overruled by non-Indigenous laws under colonialism, their influence has been greatly eroded.Despite this legacy, many Indigenous communities across Canada, maintaining and developing their own traditions, continue to be guided by them in the governance of their communities, the environment, and their relationships with people.Others are exploring ways to reclaim their customs and legal traditions and to restore their place in the governance of their communities.Canadian society also has begun to recognize the importance of Indigenous legal traditions and Aboriginal law making.With formal recognition of the inherent Aboriginal right to self-government and the observation by the Supreme Court of Canada that the customary laws of Aboriginal peoples survived the assertion of sovereignty by the Crown, Canada has begun to embrace its unique legally pluralistic identity.The relationship between Indigenous and Canadian legal orders and the ways in which Indigenous legal traditions might be recognized and given space in the Canadian legal landscape are the common threads linking the chapters in this collection.As Andrée Lajoie notes in the Introduction, in each of the essays the authors explore "how to come out of colonialism ... from differing angles."In examining different aspects of and models for the recognition and accommodation of Indigenous legal orders, the authors also present us with several different visions of legal pluralism.

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)0.005
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 score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5160.312

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooksSame topicIndigenous Peoples' Rights and LawFrench-language works237,207