Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warren Weir and Wanda Wuttunee Two significant documents on Aboriginal economy were released in this past year.The Assembly of First Nations presented their report on The State of the First Nation Economy and the Struggle to Make Poverty History in March.The report was prepared for the AFN Inter-Nation Trade and Economic Summit by the Assembly of First Nations Make Poverty History Expert Advisory Committee.And in June this year, the Canadian Federal Government announced its new Framework on Aboriginal Economic Development.Both documents require a response from the general public, Aboriginal organizations, communities and their leaders, and educational and other think-tanks, as well as corporate, government, and civil groups.To start this process in our own way, for CANDO, we have added this new section, the State of the Aboriginal Economy.To open up the discussion, Oppenheimer and Weir introduce and review the Federal Government of Canada's newly introduced Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development.Their brief paper provides the conceptual framework upon which the government will build future policies and programs.The Framework is replacing the Canadian Aboriginal Economic Development Strategy (CAEDS), which was released in 1989.As such, it is important that the new Framework be understood and ideas for improving its implementation be shared.The authors conclude the paper with several introductory questions about the Framework with the intent to initiate further discussion on the Framework and to stimulate ideas for this new section in the subsequent issues of this Journal.
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 | 0.005 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.165 | 0.104 |
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".