MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1848906295 · doi:10.7202/1013538ar

Entre solidarité communautaire et charité organisée, entre expression identitaire et « marketing » territorial : guiannée, guignolée en Amérique du Nord et hogmanay en Écosse

2013· article· fr· W1848906295 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Anne Postic, Fañch Postic

Bibliographic record

VenueRabaska Revue d ethnologie de l Amérique française · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduites en Amérique du Nord par les colons français, les quêtes de la « guignolée » et de la « guiannée » relèvent d’une pratique qui, au moment du changement d’année, était répandue dans l’ouest de l’Europe, de l’Écosse au nord jusqu’à l’Espagne au sud. À Sainte-Geneviève, dans le Missouri, et à La Prairie-du-Rocher, dans l’Illinois, elles demeurent l’expression d’une forte solidarité communautaire et d’un passé identitaire francophone. Si là, comme dans le pays de Retz, au sud de Nantes, les quêteurs s’attachent à maintenir une tradition établie voici plusieurs siècles, il en va autrement de la Grande guignolée des médias canadienne ou du Hogmanay festival d’Édimbourg dont les implications médiatiques, économiques, voire touristiques donnent lieu à des débats sur ce que certains considèrent comme des concessions à la mondialisation et à la marchandisation de la culture. La comparaison des situations franco-américaines et écossaises permet alors d’envisager l’éventail des possibles des évolutions contemporaines d’une même fête.

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)0.002
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 score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.022
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRabaska Revue d ethnologie de l Amérique françaiseSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207