MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396715349 · doi:10.29173/mlj1305

Indigenous Oral History Reader

2022· article· en· W4396715349 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Bryan P. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueManitoba Law Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsOral historyIndigenousContext (archaeology)Oral traditionNegotiationVariety (cybernetics)MainstreamHistoryGovernment (linguistics)SociologyLawPolitical scienceAestheticsSocial scienceAnthropologyArtLinguisticsArchaeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oral history of Indigenous people in Canada has been recognized by mainstream legal systems in Canada over the past few decades as being of fundamental importance in court cases and negotiations with Indigenous peoples. As Indigenous peoples further exercise their right to self-government, they will continue drawing their oral traditions to define and develop their autonomous legal system. This anthology attempts to collect a wide variety of materials that embody many perspectives. It attempts to place those materials within a conceptual framework that might be helpful in looking at Indigenous oral history, and indeed oral history generally. That framework includes viewing oral history in three dimensions of time - testimony about recent events, oral histories that encompass an individual's lifetime, and oral traditions that are passed down from generation to generation. The framework includes looking at oral history in the context of how many cultures and traditions incorporate oral history in their legal systems and cultures. It asks both how values and methods differ among communities and how they reflect widespread or virtually universal tendencies. The framework also invites the reader to consider the different ways in which oral evidence can or should be reinforced or qualified by references to other sources of information, such as other oral evidence, documentary testimony and physical evidence of various kinds. It is hoped that this collection will be of assistance to others in studying or developing their own teaching materials in this dynamic area.

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1250.019

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManitoba Law JournalSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207