MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W806964740

The Little Shell Chippewa: Putting a Price Tag on Identity

2013· article· en· W806964740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Candace Rojo, Allison Bye

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Mathematics Enthusiast · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Shell (structure)LawPolitical scienceArtEngineeringAesthetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Montana refused the Turtle Mountain Reservation treaty, the United States government pushed them off their homelands and refused to recognize them as a sovereign nation. They were bounced between reservations and rejected from both Canada and the United States. In 2000, Montana recognized the Little Shell as an indigenous tribe; however, their petition to be recognized by the federal government was denied in 2009. The petition was filed in 1978. Federally recognized tribes receive aid from the U.S. government, meaning the Little Shell do not, but they are still fighting for recognition. They do, however, receive some assistance from the state of Montana. Minimal governmental help forces the tribe to obtain funds from other outlets to pay for tribal employees, tribal events and legal fees for their recognition fight. There are currently 566 federally recognized tribes in the U.S. and about 254 tribes fighting for recognition (Department of the Interior), proving the struggle isn’t restricted to this tribe. This multimedia and print story will focus on how the Little Shell operate on their limited budget — $22,000 — by running off the donated time of volunteers. Most tribal council members around the country are paid for their duties; however, the Little Shell have only two paid employees (a secretary and tobacco-prevention specialist) and no paid council members. Often members will use wages from additional jobs to supplement their tribal involvement, essentially paying for their cultural identity. Information was gathered through in-person interviews on and off camera, analyzing tribal records and spending entire days experiencing the life of council members, volunteers and paid employees. Still photography also played a role in capturing the experience. The researchers spent a week between Great Falls (tribal headquarters) and the tribal president’s home and office in Billings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Mathematics EnthusiastSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207