Le Peuple cri de la Baie James parl e aux Gouvernements : Développement, Gouvernance et Co-Gouvernance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans ce texte, j'explore les discussions entre, les intervenants cris et ]es représentants des gouvernements au cours des années afin de comprendre les visions cries et gouvernementales sur le développement de leurs relations. Je discute de deux moments critiques : d'une part, lors des négociations de 1974 ayant mené à la Convention de la Baie James et du Nord québécois; d'autre part, juste avant la signature de l'Accord dit de la Paix des Braves en 2002. Dans chaque cas, les Cris ont parlé du genre de rapports qui étaient nécessaires entre eux-mêmes, les gouvernements et les compagnies non-cries. Ils ont parlé aussi des difficultés auxquelles ils étaient confrontés quand ils essayaient de vivre et d'améliorer ces relations. De même, j'examinerai brièvement quel genre de relations les gouvernements voulaient avoir avec les Cris au moment où furent négociés ces deux accords. - - In this chapter I explore what I have learned about Cree and government views of their relationships by looking at the ways that Cree people spoke to governments at two critical moments - just as the negotiation of the James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement was getting underway in 1974, and just prior to the 2002 Québec - Cree agreement. In each case Crees spoke about what kind of relationships were needed between themselves and non-Cree governments and corporations. They also spoke about the difficulties they faced trying to live by and create such relationships. I also look briefly at what kinds of relationships governments said they wanted at the time they negotiated these two agreements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".