Bibliographic record
Abstract
What makes music Métis, and who gets to decide? Complex dynamics of recognition, non-recognition, and erasure have played out over a history of Métis music-making, from the Red River Resistance all the way to the present day. Monique Giroux argues that Métis music reflects broader social relationships, in particular the politics of recognition. Drawing on newspaper articles, archival documents, interviews with Métis and non-Métis musicians, and over a decade of research at cultural festivals, she charts a history of reframings: a changing but problematic relationship whereby settlers define the boundaries of acceptance to assert control over Métis identity and culture. Complicating this narrative, Giroux points to the many ways Métis have resisted settler recognition and erasure – both within mainstream old-time fiddling and at Métis-run events where people have continued to gather, tell stories, and draw on music to rebuild relationships in a time of resurgence. Métis Music critically examines music as a shifting site of encounter, showing its readers what to listen for, how to learn by listening, and the importance of acting intentionally with the learning gained through listening.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.016 |
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".