The recycling of people from nowhere, from nothing, for justice: The paradox of policing truth and reconciliation in Western Canada through a clash of state-mandated systemic injustice and hegemony of Indigenous knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The researcher observed a city bus painted with Indigenous artwork. They then saw two Indigenous people experiencing social challenges get off the bus, and everyone backed away. It personified justice system approaches to Truth and Reconciliation (TAR) through paternalistic performative measures, such as the bus painting, which resembles TAR but does not provide meaningful change to the complex social issues and inequities experienced by the two Indigenous Peoples that TAR is meant to address. In contrast, calls for equality or colourblind approaches coupled with no legal mandates to include Indigenous knowledge that honours reciprocal relational approaches, Numbered Treaty Obligations, or numerous inquiries that have produced the Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action (TRC), National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Calls for Justice (NIMMIWG), and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) stop the justice system, including police, from supporting the people getting off the bus.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.068 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".