Bibliographic record
Abstract
n August of 2002, The Manitoba Legislative Assembly enacted Bill 35, The Child and Family Services Authorities Act. 1 It is enabling legislation created to provide for the administration of child and family services throughout Manitoba.This Act was introduced as Bill 35 in the Manitoba Legislature on 10 June 2002 and received general support from all the members of the Legislature.It passed and received Royal Assent on 8 August 2002.Bill 35 has been heralded as "a tremendous moment in Manitoba's history." 2 According to Tim Sale, Minister of Family Services, "This legislation will make Manitoba the first province in Canada to give First Nations and Métis people responsibility for child and family services wherever they reside in Manitoba."3 Bill 35 restructures the governance and delivery of child welfare services across the province of Manitoba by creating four new authorities.Two of the new authorities will serve First Nations, both Northern and Southern, a third authority will serve Métis people, and the fourth will serve all other residents of the province.The stated purpose of the legislation is to ensure that the development and delivery of programs and services to First Nations and Métis people respects their values, beliefs, customs and traditional communities.4 In just 32 pages of concise and plain language, Bill 35 lays the foundation for "broad and systemic change" 5 -change undoubtedly triggered by the report and recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice 1 S.M. 2002, c. 35 [Bill 35] (not yet proclaimed).2 Mia Rabson "Natives, Métis to get own agencies.NDP legislation would create four child, family service organizations" Winnipeg Free Press (12 June 2002) A13.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.014 |
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".