Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I summarize the current state of economists’ contributions to the economic history of Indigenous Peoples in North America. After briefly providing some context, I describe the current state of the literature, which is dominated by studies focusing on the period post-1800, over 300 years after contact. With a few exceptions, the literature largely paints a story of dispossession and decline after a golden era of economic interdependence in the fur trade. While valuable, I suggest this story is just a glimpse of something substantively more significant and fundamental to the economic history of North America. Understanding the centrality of Indigenous Peoples in North American economic history broadly and of Indigenous Peoples’ continued existence as economic actors offers yet unseen opportunities to revise our understanding of North American economic development. Beyond this, studying Indigenous North American history offers new opportunities to understand and reimagine how nations and economic systems rise, fall, interact with changing ecological systems, and persist in the face of dramatic change.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it