MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Civilizing Mission, Women’s Labor, and the Mixed-Race Families of the Old Northwest

2022· book-chapter· en· W4405311656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Witgen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Gender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Traders and the mixed-race population that engaged in the fur trade became one of the principal means by which the government, federal and territorial, could influence the largely Indigenous population northwest of Detroit. Missionaries, sent by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM) to educate the mixed-race children of the American fur company employees, worked to foster a sense of national identity among these nascent citizens who lived at the American Fur Company posts. Fur traders, often French Canadian or British immigrants, were recognized as settler-citizens. Similarly, the Indigenous and mixed-race wives and children of American Fur Company employees were also recognized as American citizens. Traders and missionaries understood that marriage, especially to Indigenous or mixed-race women, was a necessary condition for success because of the crucial domestic and linguistic labor Native women provided. At odds with goals of the ABCFM, the U.S. government was not concerned about the civilization of the Odawaag and Ojibweg but rather wanted to convert their homeland into public domain to sell to white settlers. With statehood looming and the settler population booming, Henry Schoolcraft pressured the Anishinaabeg to sell their lands and accept new territory west of the Mississippi.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→