MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599621373 · doi:10.4000/norois.1988

Les composantes patrimoniales du canoë récréatif au Canada

2006· article· fr· W1599621373 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNorois · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsCanarie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le canoë est indissociable de la formation du Canada et de son histoire, de celle des Indiens et, à partir du xviesiècle, de celle des Européens, trappeurs, coureurs des bois, prospecteurs, voyageurs, et des Métis. De fait, l’histoire de ce vaste pays explique et s’explique par les évolutions techniques de la production de ce canoë. Dans cet article, nous tentons de comprendre la place et le rôle social et économique du canoë et sa dimension culturelle, les relations à la Nature et au territoire qu’il autorise, et en quoi il fut aussi bien élément essentiel de mode de vie que moyen de déplacement et de transport, et notamment pour la traite des fourrures. Nous nous attacherons aussi à comprendre comment ce canoë, d’utilitaire, est essentiellement devenu récréatif au cours du XXesiècle, et comment, au cours de ces évolutions, il est devenu cet emblème patrimonial, jusqu’à ce que ce loisir largement diffusé au sein du grand public perde en aura patrimoniale ce qu’il gagne en succès comme loisir sportif.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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