MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1786313474 · doi:10.29173/af17798

Les médias francophones en Belgique : enjeux identitaires

2012· article· fr· W1786313474 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc Lits

Bibliographic record

VenueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En Belgique, les découpages politiques et linguistiques rendent problématique l’affirmation d’une identité nationale ou régionale. L’évolution politique a entraîné un quadruple découpage des médias : linguistique ; chaînes publiques vs privées ; chaînes nationales vs locales ; national vs étranger. Dans ce contexte, la Flandre est devenue une terre étrangère pour les francophones, et l’inverse est également vrai. Quand un sujet est traité, il l’est comme s’il s’agissait de politique étrangère, avec des simplifications, en recourant à des stéréotypes. Prises dans ces clivages intercommunautaires, les médias belges révèlent davantage la crise identitaire d’un pays aux portes du séparatisme qu’ils ne construisent une identité forte, fût-elle de substitution. Les médias fonctionnent comme des relais de leurs opinions publiques respectives. Se pose la question du rôle de médias appartenant à des aires linguistiques différentes au sein d’une même entité politique, et de leur difficulté à trouver un équilibre entre défense des intérêts de leur communauté d’appartenance et relation distanciée des enjeux nationaux.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONESame topicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and IdentityFrench-language works237,207