Maîtres chez-nous? : fédéralisme, fédérations et autonomie autochtone dans les Amériques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les dernières décennies du XXe siècle ont été marquées par le réveil politique des peuples autochtones des Amériques. Cette résurgence s’est manifestée sur le plan politique par les demandes autochtones d’autonomie afin d’établir un cadre de relations plus justes avec l’État. Cette thèse étudie comment deux fédérations – des régimes qui, selon certains universitaires, incarnent les principes du fédéralisme en tant que combinaison du gouvernement partagé et autonome – répondent aux demandes d’autonomie autochtone. Ensuite, en partant du constat que l’adaptation institutionnelle des fédérations canadienne et mexicaine a été insuffisante pour combler les aspirations autonomiques des peuples autochtones, la thèse présente une réflexion normative sur le rétablissement de l’autogouvernement autochtone et la réconciliation des souverainetés autochtone et étatique par le biais du fédéralisme.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".