MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1961724298 · doi:10.4000/eps.1189

Collectivized Identity among Shi’a Imami Isma’ili Muslims of Calgary:Implications for Pluralism and Policy

2006· article· en· W1961724298 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yvonne M. Hébert, Rani Murji

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace populations sociétés · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsBP (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyEthnologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Installés au Canada depuis une trentaine d’années, les musulmans ismaéliens de secte Shi’a Imami à Calgary sont caractérisés par une grande diversité. Le critère déterminant de l’identité collective dans une société démocratique libérale plurielle est une question essentielle. À partir d’une étude sur les contextes identitaires des jeunes immigrés, des interviews avec parents et chefs communautaires indiquent que la religion est un élément-clé de définition. Plusieurs stratégies collectives servent à la construction d’un nouvel ordre social dans un nouveau contexte et le maintien de sa cohésion sociale. La citoyenneté est considérée par les participants comme un processus complexe qui garantit le respect des droits de la personne et permet aussi une appartenance collective tandis que l’intégration exige une recherche de l’ouverture face à la discrimination et les préjugés. Dans le cadre de la politique canadienne de multiculturalisme, la création des identités hybridisées exprime la double dimension de la brutalité linguistique de l’installation en terre nouvelle et d’un espoir idéalisé dans ce nouveau contexte de vie.

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)0.003
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 score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace populations sociétésSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207