Review of <i>We Are All Treaty People: Prairie Essays</i> by\nRoger Epp. Edmonton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the aftermath of the 1996 release of the massive report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, and Canada's subsequent official statement of regret for the "Indian policies" that successive governments have pursued down to our own day, "We Are All Treaty People: History, Reconciliation and the 'Settler Problem'" is arguably this book's most provocative essay. Roger Epp begins by asserting that the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the Euro-Canadian settlers who came afterward "constitutes a ... powerful common history, inherited, not chosen, whose birthright we can either disavow, because its burdens are too great, or else make our own through respectful initiatives." He then goes on to suggest that there is no better place to begin this process of reconciliation than in the rural West, where small towns and Aboriginal communities face common challenges: an overdependence on transfers from senior governments, the out-migration of many of the best and brightest of their young people, and the limited opportunities inherent in a global economy (where investment concentrates in the cities, and the rural places most desperate for employment are forced to bid against each other to attract whatever jobs they can).
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.009 |
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".