Que veut dire « francophone » au Québec ? Un attribut identitaire vu par les intellectuels africains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le triptyque :francophone, anglophoneetallophonetraverse nombre de discours populaires et d’écrits universitaires qui renvoient à la composition démographique du Québec. En fait, ces trois qualificatifs tiennent lieu de catégorisation identitaire de la société québécoise. Par eux chaque membre de cette société se voit assigné une identité qui le définit par rapport au reste des résidents du Québec. L’étude que voici interroge les modalités d’assignation de cette identité ainsi que sa réception. En se focalisant sur le label defrancophone, elle rend compte de la discordance dans l’entendement de ce qualificatif entre les intellectuels originaires de l’Afrique subsaharienne et le groupe démographique dominant au Québec. Ce faisant, elle met à nu la dimension conflictuelle et l’enjeu social qui se dégagent de l’usage de cet attribut identitaire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".