MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485309404 · doi:10.3917/rhmc.544.0117

Colons, colonisés ou émigrés ?

2007· article· fr· W1485309404 on OpenAlex
Éric T. Jennings

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesEthnologyPolitical scienceArtImmigrationHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unique colonie française de peuplement quasi-exclusivement blanche aux XIXe et XXe siècles, l’archipel de Saint-Pierre et Miquelon représente pourtant un cas très peu étudié en matière d’identité impériale. Les projets successifs d’évacuation des îles dans la première moitié du XXe siècle permettent de mettre en relief des ambiguïtés tout à fait significatives: les îliens furent en effet l’objet d’une attention considérable,tant au Québec qu’en France,du fait, principalement de leur «sang»; mais en même temps leur reconversion éventuelle en agriculteurs fut l’objet de longs débats, et leur francité fut même remise en question dans certains contextes.Ces émigrations,rappelant pour d’aucuns le «grand dérangement» des Acadiens, révèlent à la fois des débats, des failles et des tensions autour de l’immigration et de l’identité dans deux cadres différents:en France et au Canada – et ce à une époque charnière pour leurs politiques d’immigration respectives.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.246 · 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