MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7002608203

Négociation, surveillance et dépossessions : la territorialité ojibwe (1815-1860)

2023· dissertation· fr· W7002608203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismContext (archaeology)Colonial period
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire explore la dépossession territoriale des Ojibweg au profit du gouvernement canadien dans toutes ces dimensions — qu’elles soient économiques, politiques, mais particulièrement culturelles. C’est l’analyse fortement inspirée de la géographie culturelle, trop peu considérée dans le récit traditionnel du colonialisme de peuplement, qui représente le principal thème de ce travail. Le cas exemple retenu est celui des Ojibweg de la Garden River First Nation, entre 1815 et 1860. Par la figure du chef Shingwaukonse, cette communauté entretenait une diplomatie très active avec la Couronne britannique, par l’entremise des représentants de ces colonies canadiennes. Ces traces permettent de voir l’étendue de la dépossession totale que nécessite le colonialisme de peuplement. Afin d’y arriver, il faut d’abord refaire un récit de la région du Sault-Sainte-Marie dans sa dimension transfrontalière, pour dégager les dynamiques coloniales multiples que subissaient les Ojibweg de la région. Ce narratif commence sur une échelle régionale vaste propre à l’Empire britannique, avant de s’arrêter sur la vision identitaire de ce groupe, nouvellement dépossédé.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→