MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1550357541 · doi:10.7202/1017875ar

Francophonie. Idéologie, variation, canon : modèlesquébécoispour la francophonie littéraire

2013· article· fr· W1550357541 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
François Provenzano

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’histoire de la francophonie et celle du Québec présentent une nette intersection au cours de la décennie 1960, où s’affirment les premiers plaidoyers pour une « Civilisation de l’Universel » en langue française, en même temps que se produit la Révolution tranquille. Cette intersection colore les premières contributions québécoises à la cause francophone d’une teinte idéologique bien identifiable. La recherche en littérature prendra ensuite des inflexions différentes, et le Québec se distinguera pour son rôle pionnier dans la mise en oeuvre de méthodes ou de questionnements nouveaux, qui orienteront globalement le paradigme des études francophones : la langue d’écriture, le rapport à la France, l’inscription sociale du littéraire. Enfin, les travaux québécois manifestent un intérêt particulier pour la question du canon littéraire. Si cet intérêt est souvent animé par une visée critique, il témoigne aussi d’un souci d’articuler de nouvelles échelles de valeurs, plus locales. En cela également, le Québec pourrait constituer un modèle susceptible d’influer sur les derniers développements en études francophones.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations39
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207