Letter from the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting, in answer to Senate resolution of February 27, 1884, a report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs relative to the leasing of lands upon the Crow Indian Reservation in Montana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
to graze their herd upon the western part of the Crow Reservation from the beginning to the close of the present fiscal ye~r, for which privilege they have paid the sum of $250, the same being taken up on the agent's quarterly accounts for the third quarter of 1883 ; the other to George L. Ash, of Billings, Mont., to graze a small herd of 75 cattle ' temporarHy upon the reservation, just opposite his ranch, for which privilege he also has paid the sum of $37.50, which bas been taken up by the agent on his quarterly accounts for the 4th quarter of 1883.In explanation of this last mentioned permit, Agent Armstrong states:A battalion of the S.econd Cavalry, under command of Major Merrill, had been stationed on this reservation opposite the town of Billings during the.entire summer of ,1882, and Mr. Ash claimed to have been authorized by the commanding officer to bring his cattle over to the south side of the Yellowstone in order that he might supply the military with milk and butter.By doing so his cattle became accustomed to the range, and it was difficult for Mr. Ash to keep them off.They were-remo\'ed once by the agency herder, but returned.Late in the fall (l ~83) Mr. Ash came to me here and begged so hard that I gave him permission to allow bis small herd to remain for a limited time on the range, they being already on the sontll side of the river, as I understand.The facts in connection with the Briggs permit, so far as the action of this Department is concerned, :;tre as follows:May 9, 1883, Agent Armstrong reported to this office that Thomas Kent, a white man lawfully married to a Crow Indian woman, and for some years prior resident on
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".