MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599282906 · doi:10.7202/019981ar

Le vol des soupes aux choux : une tradition acadienne de Pombcoup ?

2009· article· fr· W1599282906 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carmen d’Entremont

Bibliographic record

VenueRabaska Revue d ethnologie de l Amérique française · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité Sainte-Anne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En Acadie, pendant la première moitié du xxe siècle, les tours étaient un amusement commun parmi les jeunes garçons. Se limitant surtout à des exemples et des résultats tirés d’une étude récente sur la tradition orale de Pubnico, Nouvelle-Écosse, cette note de recherche présente une mystification particulière qui fut en pleine vitalité dans ce village acadien au début du xxe siècle : le vol des soupes aux choux. Ce rituel d’automne se déroulait ordinairement en soirée, dans le cadre d’une veillée organisée. Les hôtes invitaient quelques amis à venir jouer aux cartes, chanter et, bien sûr, manger de la soupe. En plus des attraits de la rencontre sociale, on voulait voir si la soupe serait volée. Selon plusieurs attestations, le but était d’emporter la soupe dans un autre lieu dans l’intention de la consommer avant d’être découvert, car les victimes circulaient souvent d’une maison à l’autre en espérant retrouver leur soupe. Après avoir confirmé la présence de cette tradition unique dans ce milieu, la question posée est de savoir si le vol des soupes aux choux est une coutume née localement, ou si on l’a vécue ailleurs.

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)0.001
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 score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRabaska Revue d ethnologie de l Amérique françaiseSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207