Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Canadian Studies is often described as a conversation, engaged in by all who explore experience and character.1 Ideally, it transcends the partial perspectives of disciplines, and, informed by activist aspirations, bridges the divide between academia and the Canadian community. The record of this conversation and its future agenda were examined closely in the recent millennium issues (Volume 35) of the Journal of Canadian Studies. As Robert Campbell and others explained, the themes animating Canadian Studies - the distinctiveness of the Canadian experience, the uncertain place of Canada in an era of globalization, the relevance of equality, justice, democracy and other noble themes to the Canada project - remain as relevant as ever. In everyday life, of course, we usually talk about more mundane matters - our own splinters of the collective experience. But the last few months have also shown how the shared witnessing of a great and horrendous event can pull Canadians into a joint effort to make sense of unprecedented images and a changed reality. Since September, academics have participated in this, contributing context and meaning on topics ranging from Afghan politics to Islam to national security. Those who study Canada have contributed their share of commentary. Just in the last few days Canadian academics have pronounced on the implications for civil liberties of anti-terrorism legislation, the rediscovered relevance of government as the purveyor of public goods, and the possible impact on architecture of new feelings of urban vulnerability. American efforts to reshape the geopolitical order into a united front against terrorism will only sharpen the challenges for Canada of defining its distinctive role in world affairs, and a distinctive experience worth reporting to the world. But there may be limits to the contribution academics can make to understanding these challenges. In daily conversation, 11 has become the shorthand for the attacks on New York and Washington, and their aftermath. After all, we often prefer to understand history in terms of specific dates. But this preference runs counter to the familiar tendency in academic discourse to focus on larger trends - the deeper currents of change, not the rough waves of daily events. Let me provide an example from my own field, environmental history: while popular writers tend to explain the origins of environmental concerns in terms of specific events (the publication of Silent Spring in 1962; the first voyage of Greenpeace; Earth Day on 22 April 1970), historians usually trace these concerns to less dramatic but more sweeping changes in society and politics, such as increased education, greater opportunities for leisure, and an expanded role for government as the guarantor of public goods such as clean air and water. Similarly, September seems likely to become a touchstone of public memory (where were you on the day. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,033 | 0,035 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,033 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».