MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392816013 · doi:10.29173/jaed315

Aboriginal Tourism: St. Eugene Mission, BC

2012· article· en· W4392816013 on OpenAlexaff
Thea Pedersen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aboriginal Economic Development · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgnoranceTourismIndigenousHarmService (business)White (mutation)Closure (psychology)SociologyBusinessHistoryPolitical scienceLawMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[...]a tourist organization's primary service could be providing luxurious accommodations, but to guarantee success, it is likely to employ other industries including catering facilities, transportation services, and souvenir retailers. (2007) states, "much of the harm that has been perpetuated by dominant society on Indigenous people has been, and continues to be, based on ignorance" (p 3). [...]if such projects are able to adequately educate tourists about contemporary Aboriginal issues with respect to historical events, the presence of hostile negative relationships between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal people will be lessened, as ignorance regarding Aboriginal issues becomes something of the past. The St. Eugene Mission, located on reserve land near Cranbrook British Columbia, offers tourists a 4.5 star rated experience with access to an 18-hole golf course, a licensed casino, a gourmet restaurant, and of course luxury accommodations. Pierre refers to the period between the school closure and the re-opening as a "huge white elephant" (Pierre, 2009, p. 42), as it levied high monetary costs for the five bands to keep it running without any benefit to the community.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1900.022

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.335 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aboriginal Economic DevelopmentSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207