MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028860992

Has Canada Cut Indian Affairs in Half or Cloned it?

2017· other· en· W7028860992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMohawkIndigenousTheme (computing)MetisPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Double the fun or double trouble? Seemingly out of nowhere, the federal Liberals have decided to re-arrange the political furniture as part of a late summer shuffle of their Cabinet. What is now Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada will be cleaved in twoin future, First Nations will have to deal with the department of "Crown-Indigenous relations and Northern Affairs" and the department of "Indigenous Services."But will INAC be cleaved so much as cloned? What does this ostensible re-org actually, concretely mean? In light of this unexpected shift, were doing a shift of our own this week to go as deep as possible on exactly these questions with special guests Russ Diabo, a Kahnawake Mohawk analyst, writer and activist, and Peter Di Gangi, a land rights researcher and analyst with Sicani Research. // Our theme is 'nesting' by birocratic.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6380.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.167 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)Same topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207