Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professor Patzer provides a current example in this chapter for understanding settler colonialism in practice, illustrated through what occurred during the recent crisis affecting the Wet’suwet’en land defenders in British Columbia. Here, he scrutinizes the mixture of law and politics that has dispossessed the Wet’suwet’en of much of their land and ability to fully determine their future, given they are facing the pending imposition of a pipeline on their unceded territory. By delegitimizing Wet’suwet’en traditionalists, the settler state ignores and obscures how they have been challenged when called upon to explain the legitimacy of colonial dispossession, especially in British Columbia, where much of the land is not accounted for by historical land cession treaties. Patzer maintains that while the higher courts have recently been engaged in rewriting Canadian Aboriginal law to produce new legal principles to address past controversies, in effect, what they have produced are “half-measures” of justice. These practices are reflective of an inability to engage with difficult questions about the legitimacy of the Crown’s sovereignty over Indigenous peoples and their lands, further perpetuating colonial conflicts.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".