MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1641476199 · doi:10.7202/1028859ar

Les images de la parenté: exploration de quelques compositions photographiques et corporelles dans les îles Belcher (Nunavut)

2015· article· fr· W1641476199 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Florence Dupré

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis plusieurs décennies, dans l’Arctique canadien, la pratique des relations sociales se trouve nourrie par le champ des technologies de l’image et de la communication à différentes échelles. Parmi ces technologies, les techniques de représentations imagées de la personne constituent, à travers la photographie et certaines modalités de représentation graphique, des pratiques quotidiennement investies par différentes générations inuit. Au terme d’une recherche doctorale en anthropologie, cet article propose d’examiner quelques pistes ethnographiques relatives aux relations de parenté inuit contemporaines. Il examine notamment une approche de la parenté dans le village de Sanikiluaq (îles Belcher, Nunavut) en termes de processus électifs (c’est-à-dire des façons de choisir, mais également de transformer ou non un lien en une relation effective et pratiquée). Cette approche s’applique à un certain nombre de pratiques impliquant les supports photographiques et corporels (à travers le tatouage) dans les stratégies de fabrication du lien social et parental. Elle interroge dans cette perspective le rôle de l’agencement domestique des photographies de famille dans les pratiques d’appropriation de l’enfant et la fonction de certains types de tatouages identifiés comme «tatouages-relation» dans le processus de production, de pratique et d’interruption du lien de parenté.

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 score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/StudiesSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207