American Perspectives on La fièvre aux États-Unis, 1860–1930 : A Historiographical analysis of Recent Writings on the Franco-Americans in New England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se pourrait-il que le faux renouveau des années 1970 n’ait été que le présage d’un vrai renouveau, lequel sera vécu dans les décennies à venir? – Armand Chartier, Les Franco-Américains de la Nouvelle-Angleterre, 1991.The great French Canadian migrations of the latter half of the nineteenth century and the subsequent survival of Franco-American descendants have long fascinated scholars. Carroll Wright’s study of the French immigration across the border, The Canadian French in New England, circulated in the New England region as early as 1882. . The Franco-American community of New England has since been the object of numerous studies. French Canadian scholars in particular have devoted much attention to the study of la Franco-Américanie, undoubtedly because the “grande hémorragie” was a traumatic episode in their history.1 Immigration figures tell the story of a massive exodus from French Canada: recent estimates show that over 600, 000 French Canadians, out of a population of 1.5 million, left their homeland in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Their Franco-American descendants number over three million in the New England states (Chartier 383).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".