MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972814173 · doi:10.7202/021180ar

La frontière Québec-Maine : quelques aspects limologiques et socio-économiques

2005· article· fr· W1972814173 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'article proposé ici prend, dans une optique systématique et régionale à la fois, un exemple peu étudié jusqu'ici en géographie politique : la frontière Québec-Maine. II s'efforce de montrer quels sont les différents éléments techniques constituant l'articulation de cette frontière et comment le caractère contentieux et ambigu de celle-ci a été réglé par une solution de compromis. Malgré son caractère récent, la frontière Québec-Maine possède les anomalies que l'on retrouve dans certaines frontières plus anciennes. II est démontré ici que la frontière Québec-Maine n'est ni naturelle ni artificielle car ces deux concepts sont dénués de tout fondement. Enfin, le fait que la partie américaine de cette frontière soit une periclave a favorisé l'implantation d'une monoactivité industrielle du côté québécois. Son existence est aujourd'hui remise en question par un dépeuplement massif qui hypothèque lourdement l'avenir de la région.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.012
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.265 · 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