An Examination of Settler-Colonial Genocide in Canada at the Microlevel of Reserves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genocide of the Indigenous peoples in Canada under colonization and settler-colonialism, is analyzed through Decolonization theory, using the United Nations Convention on Genocide definition of genocide, formally ratified by Canada in 1952. This includes the debate of ‘cultural’ genocide verse genocide period. Settler-colonialist mode of socioeconomic and political operation continues genocide via attrition, particularly via the healthcare disparity faced by Indigenous peoples. Issues: residential schools, overincarceration, obesity, inaccessibility of safe drinking water, opioid use, and the 60s scoop to present day millennial scoop. In a given Indigenous society, the elements and acts defining genocide are discernable, here from documents such as reports by the departments and institutional structures that comprise the Canadian system that have been directed towards Indigenous peoples. This is because genocide continues to be an ongoing process. Biigtigong Nishnaabeg First Nation Reserve my home community, is the societal example analyzed for examples substantive of the UN definition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".