Review of <i>The Long Journey of a Forgotten People: Metis Identities and Family Histories</i> Edited by UteLischke and David T. McNab; <i>The Western Metis: Profile of a People</i> Edited by Patrick C. Douaud
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent publication of Long Journey and Western Metis is indicative of the burgeoning interest in Metis studies; there are a remarkable number of scholars, new and old, now publishing in the area. It seems likely that this burst of activity is related to the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Powley, 2003, S.c.c. 43 (http://www.canliLorg/en/ca/scc/ doc/2003/2003scc43/2003scc43.html) dealing with the complex issues of Metis identity and rights. Though the impetus for the publications might be linked to a common legal event, the publications themselves are very different: The Western Metis is a collection well rooted in an older historiography of the Metis, while The Long Journey is very much located on the margins of that historiography. Not unlike the Powley decision itself, The Long Journey outlines new scope for contemporary Metis studies.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".