Bibliographic record
Abstract
This doctoral thesis deals with problems of identification of people who 1) consider themselves as Iroquois, or 2) are considered as Iroquois. The Iroquois are original inhabitants of North America living predominantly in the northeastern part of the U.S.A. (namely the State of New York) and in adjacent parts of Canada (provinces Ontario and Quebec). The thesis concentrates mainly on the process of identity or identities formation in the context of policies of the U.S. (and individual union states) and Canada (and individual Canadian provinces) which stipulate the legal framework for definition of membership of the group, rules for border crossing and jurisdiction in the reserves. Further the thesis examines the selfidentification of the Iroquois on the basis of kinship, place of residence, recognition or rejection of own political representatives and consequently fractioning of communities, religions, native languages, symbols, oral traditions and specific matters such as the game of lacross. A special emphasis is laid on boarding schools which formed the part of assimilationist policies of the U.S. and Canadian governments and exerted enormous influence on the shape of identity of the Aboriginal peoples. The position and activities of the Iroquois on the international scene are also discussed as part of...
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".