MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005792498

Self-made rebel or exploited instrument? : Sitting Bull's paradoxical role in native American cultural history 1877 - 1890

2015· article· en· W7005792498 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnipub UB Graz (Universität Graz) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVanderbilt University
KeywordsNative americanSittingGovernment (linguistics)BattleCultural historyOrder (exchange)Position (finance)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This master's thesis primarily deals with the stereotypes associated with the famous Hunkpapa Lakota Sioux holy man and tribal chief Sitting Bull.It strives to account for all of his different portrayals, interpreting his position in the Native American cultural history 1877 -1890 by taking into account various discourses.Throughout the thesis two important concepts are questioned: How is 'the Native American symbol' Sitting Bull perceived and portrayed?How does the non-Native discourse '(mis)use' his image?Arguing that the symbolical image of Sitting Bull was largely exploited not only by both the Federal government of the United States and the Government of Canada respectively, but also by the powerful individuals around him, this master's thesis therefore aims at the reconstruction of his above-mentioned stereotypical portrayals, while defining the actual scope of such well-calculated manipulation.Misusing Sitting Bull as a persona non grata on all levels in order to politically or personally profit from the troublesome situation 'his Sioux group' found itself in after the famous Battle of Little Bighorn, all the above-mentioned parties that were involved in his case were in fact motivated by their own strategic interests, seeking status and credit rather than offering selfless help to the discredited Sioux.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnipub UB Graz (Universität Graz)Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207