Bibliographic record
Abstract
Faisant appel aux études récentes portant sur la reconnaissance et l’identité sociale, nous analysons les changements dans la catégorisation de l’identité collective des groupes stigmatisés en Israël, en Irlande du Nord, au Québec et au Brésil. Alors que la littérature sur la reconnaissance tend à présumer une opposition nette entre « nous » et « eux », l’analyse de la littérature empirique démontre la complexification et la multiplication des catégories d’identité. Dans les quatre cas nous avons observé le processus de reconnaissance, en explorant les transformations de la signification des frontières internes et externes de l’identité collective pour ses membres ainsi que pour ceux qui lui sont extérieurs. Nous soutenons que la nature conditionnelle de la reconnaissance devrait conduire les chercheurs à considérer non seulement les composantes normatives du conflit ethnique mais aussi, en leur accordant une importance particulière, le langage et la catégorisation qui fondent ce type de débat.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".