MULTICULTURALISME DENSE OU VIOLENCE MASSIVE: QUATRE SCÉNARIOS POSSIBLES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Devant leur pluralisation ethnoculturelle augmentant chaque jour davantage, les États peuvent recourir à quatre principaux modes d’action: l’asssimilation qui est une forme d’exclusion dans ses formes les plus violentes (monoculturalisme); la différenciation altérisante (interculturalisme); l’institutionalisation de type pluraliste (multiculturalisme); et l’intégration à caractère relationnaliste (transculturalisme). À partir du cas canadien, ce texte propose principalement de mieux définir ces grandes approches à la gestion contemporaine du pluralisme ethnique, suggérant notamment d’entrevoir le transculturalisme comme une forme de « multiculturalisme dense » donnant une direction normative à ce qui autrement peut demeurer un cadre surtout légaliste qu’il s’agirait donc de mieux approfondir.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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".