The Return of the ‘Children of Nature’: Spectacle and Environment during Banff's Indian Days
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-Pollinations Workshop Presentations 2011 NiCHE has archived 17 audio presentations from this event This collaborative and interdisciplinary workshop brought together Canadian experts (historians, writers, literary critics, curators, environmental consultants, and visual artists) in the production and interpretation of text and visual imagery to better understand how such media enable us to know and then act on behalf of places in more sustainable and ethical ways. The places in question are Western Canadian places, including desert, prairie, mountain, and coastal environments. Citation Jonathan Clapperton “The Return of the ‘Children of Nature’: Spectacle and Environment during Banff's Indian Days” Cross-Pollination: Seeding New Ground for Environmental Thought and Activism across the Arts and Humanities. 25 March 2011. Bio : Clapperton is a PhD Candidate in the Department of History, University of Saskatchewan. Abstract : Though the indigenous population was largely excluded from Banff National Park after its creation, they would return en masse once a year for the Banff Indian Days. This paper explores how both Natives and non-Natives attempted to "restore" Aboriginal peoples to the park. It also sheds light on the various tensions that resulted from the agendas of participants, organizers and spectators, tensions which would ultimately result in conflict and the Indian Days' demise.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 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".