MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6979771663

Administrative Transfers by Settler Colonial States and Their Subjugation of Native Populations’ Land Use - A study on mechanisms of settler colonial states in Sweden and Canada during the second half of the nineteenth century

2023· other· en· W6979771663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismAlienationIdentity (music)Land rightsLand use
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines how administrative transfers by settler colonial states in nineteenth-century Sweden and Canada contributed to the subjugation of indigenous land use. Using qualitative analysis of historical documents and legal sources, the study reveals the pervasive presence of administrative transfers and their implications. In Canada, the study highlights the imposition of non-physical boundaries on indigenous identity and the hierarchical power structure that reinforced settler control. Similarly, in Sweden, regulations on Sámi peoples' practices and land distribution marginalized indigenous sovereignty. The findings underscore the multifaceted nature of settler colonialism and its objective of removing indigenous populations. The study emphasizes the need to address historical legacies, land rights, and indigenous sovereignty, and the research provides valuable insights into the mechanisms of settler colonialism and their associated alienation of indigenous peoples.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University)French-language works237,207