MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410948548 · doi:10.29173/cons29567

Slavery, Race and Abolition in Madagascar

2025· article· en· W4410948548 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Angad Phagura

Bibliographic record

VenueConstellations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Maritime and Colonial Histories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Political scienceCriminologyGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abolishing slavery in Madagascar was a project of colonial powers designed to justify their presence as a civilizing force, and the unintended consequences of their policy decisions helped shape the contours of racial identity among the Makoa and Betsileo people. This article will explore the history of this abolition and tie it to modern day descent-based discrimination in Madagascar, exploring how the preoccupations of colonial abolitionists came to define how Malagasy people conceptualize slavery and their ethnic identities today. It will also raise questions on the value of a term like slavery in a Malagasy context, by drawing on the work of Joel Quirk, and join him in questioning its discursive value. In doing so, it draws upon both primary source research of correspondence between Malagasy officials and British officials, missionary accounts and secondary sources by both anthropologists and historians. This article is aimed at both activists seeking to improve the situation of Malagasy people who are discriminated against for their alleged slave descent and at academics seeking to explore the history of Madagascar.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConstellations→Same topicGlobal Maritime and Colonial Histories→French-language works237,207→