Harperova vláda, právo na sebeurčení původních obyvatel a Indiánský zákon z roku 1876
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A debate on the reform of the frequently criticized Indian Act of 1876 - the basic law governing the rights and responsibilities of First Nations and their special status within Canada - has been getting more intense with the ongoing socio-economic problems of Aboriginal peoples. Whereas the previous Canadian government of Stephen Harper emphasized self-sufficiency and financial responsibility, First Nations have required the assertion of their constitutional rights to self-determination and self-government in any reform. This piece of work examines various proposals to reform the Indian Act and their potential effect on the status of First Nations. It focuses on Aboriginal policy stances of the Harper Government and the First Nations' reaction to the federal government's approach. In particular, it analyzes the ideas and demands of the Idle No More protest movement that emerged in response to some of the legislative proposals of the Harper Government. The author concludes by arguing that any effort to change the unfavorable situation of Aboriginal peoples in Canada would run into problems because of the discrepancy of ideas of the Conservative Government and First Nations on how to implement the reform of the Indian Act and how to enforce the right to self- determination.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it