MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526298129 · doi:10.7202/1000769ar

L’axe missionnaire catholique entre le Québec et l’Amérique latine. Une exploration préliminaire

2011· article· fr· W1526298129 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine Legrand, Stéphanie Roesler

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobe Revue internationale d’études québécoises · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir des années 1930, la rencontre des missionnaires catholiques avec l’Amérique et les Caraïbes a suscité un changement au Québec et en Amérique latine. Cet article étudie l’une des branches du catholicisme progressiste, née de l’expérience des missionnaires québécois en Amérique latine, qui engendra la formation d’organismes de développement et de solidarité ainsi que des programmes de stages en Amérique latine pour les étudiants québécois. Parallèlement, par le biais de l’Action catholique spécialisée et l’organisation de coopératives dans le Sud, les religieux et religieuses québécois contribuèrent à la pratique des communautés chrétiennes de base en Amérique latine et aux mouvements sociaux participatifs. Dans les années 1970, une autre forme de catholicisme au Québec, le Renouveau charismatique, vit naître des descendants aux Caraïbes et au Mexique. L’examen des activités internationales de l’Église catholique québécoise offre un nouvel éclairage sur les dimensions sociale, culturelle et conceptuelle des relations entre le Canada et l’Amérique latine et sur le rôle de l’Église catholique au Québec avant et après la Révolution tranquille.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobe Revue internationale d’études québécoisesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207