MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7051811902

Professor Karen Drake has co-edited a new book – Renewing Relationships: Indigenous Peoples and Canada – that includes chapters written by Professors Deborah McGregor and Signa Daum Shanks, and herself

2019· article· en· W7051811902 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrostatic Discharge in Electronics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismDeclarationIndigenous rightsInclusion (mineral)Resistance (ecology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This edited collection features essays by Indigenous legal academics from across Canada about renewing relationships between Indigenous peoples and Canada. Some Indigenous nations might embrace principles of reconciliation as reflecting a renewed relationship, while others reject the concept of reconciliation and instead advocate for resistance or decolonization. This collection includes chapters that critically engage with these theoretical debates, as well as chapters that analyze how these concepts can be instantiated in tangible and specific ways. It builds on existing literature on Indigenous-Crown relationships that addresses issues such as the inclusion of Indigenous laws, self-determination, and the role of the constitution. The chapters explore questions such as: What does a renewed relationship look like in modern Canadian society? What is the role of Indigenous law in renewing the relationship between Indigenous peoples and Canada? What does the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples contribute to an understanding of a renewed relationship? How do treaties define Indigenous-Crown relationships? What shifts must occur within Canadian institutions to move away from the current colonial relationship?

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrostatic Discharge in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207