MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009966269

GORMLEY - JIM MILLER - WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2021

2021· other· en· W7009966269 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillerIndigenousPoint (geometry)Term (time)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A group of Canadian historians is pushing back against the Canadian Historical Association's claim that Canada's history of violent and oppressive treatment of Indigenous populations \\"fully warrants our use of the word genocide\\" and claiming \\"there is a broad consensus on this point among historical experts.\\" According to an open letter signed by many leading historians, CHA does not speak for the majority of Canadian historians when it comes to the use of the term \\"genocide.\\" Saskatchewan history professor Dr. Jim Miller signed the open letter, and he joins Gormley to explain why.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9650.016

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)Same topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207