The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 17(3), 2012, article 12. Book Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
in Portland, Oregon, as well as being Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Confederated Tribes of the Grande Ronde Community of Oregon, is a citizen of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma. In this book, he moves outside of the Eurocentric paradigm of conventional legal reasoning characterizing so much of U.S. and Canadian notions of real property. Miller presents a tightly written challenge to five hundred years of this tradition. He argues (p.175) that American history and law can take on a richer meaning and understanding within the contexts of the legal background and justifications for many historical, law related and political principles. This reviewer argues that the same observations are as true of Canada and other colonial states as they are of the U.S.A. In both the U.S.A. and Canada, the Doctrine of Discovery was explicit— finders, keepers. Although Miller’s book is six years old, it carries some messages of current application not only for the U.S.A., but also for Canada. Beginning with popes in the 11 th century, the Doctrine of Discovery was widely understood by the time North America was being invaded and occupied by Europeans. England initially claimed sovereign possession of most of the continent, assuring that land titles came directly from the King’s grace. Batt continues: Miller outlines ten elements to the Doctrine of Discovery (pp. 6 – 8):
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.042 |
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".