Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Special Edition focuses onThe State of the Aboriginal Economy that has been in the works for a number of years.Following the release of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) final report in 1996 which spoke about burgeoning Aboriginal economies that were at the same time both self-contained and working effectively within the larger Canadian and provincial economies, the journal editorial board determined that it is time to try and offer some useful insights into the heart of economic activity that is flourishing at every level within First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities.We wanted to offer a glimpse into Aboriginal economic activity that is, for all intents and purposes, ill-understood if at all recognized by the vast majority of Canadians.In this journal, our work, and in our classes, we (including our colleagues and students) are documenting history in the making in an age where many Indigenous communities are moving forward to fiscal freedom in their own terms.While this often involves reconciling the rhythms of the Canadian economic system with community-based initiatives, many Aboriginal business leaders perceive this action to be valid and the only way that people with the freedom to choose can do.The reconciliation includes establishing home-based businesses, entrepreneurial endeavors, developing products and selling services to communities that rely on band-owned businesses and co-operatives.Many of the same philosophies have also been successfully utilized by communities seeking to tap into global technology markets and developing culturally appropriate, sustainable businesses.In a word, Aboriginal communities are doing what makes sense and taking on projects that are manageable.All of our journal issues to date have expanded upon these trends and this sense of movement, and this one is no different.We recognize the importance of history, offer some of the personal insights of our Economic Development winners and then give the xi Editors' Comments
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 | 0.011 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.241 | 0.176 |
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".