Contemporary Drug Problems 27/Fall 2000 435 Alcohol policy issues for indigenous people in the United
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews the literature on alcohol consumption, alcohol-related problems, and national and local policy issues for indigenous people in four developed countries (United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand). The growth ofdomestic self-determination and self-management policies within these countries has had an impact on the relationships between these groups and their national governments, which raises a number ofquestions regarding the influence ofnational alcohol policies on indigenous citizens. National "native " policies as well as discriminatory alcohol prohibitions have had long-standing effects, influencing indigenous responses to contemporary interventions in alcohol misuse. While national alcohol policies have had mixed impact, AUTHOR'S NOTE: This paper was written for a meeting of the Alcohol Policy and the Public Good collaborators in Copenhagen in February 2000, under the guidance of Griffith Edwards. I am grateful for the contri-butions from members of the group, particularly the detailed and helpful comments on my paper provided by Raul Caetano, Sally Casswell, Norman Giesbrecht and Robin Room. I also thank those people who responded at short notice to my requests, particularly Greg Brass, Francoise
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".