Pour « Une politique globale, précise, cohérente et définitive de développement »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article analyse la réceptivité des leaders franco-ontariens aux encadrements politiques élaborés par le gouvernement de Pierre Elliott Trudeau de 1968 à 1984. D’emblée, la réaction à la Loi sur les langues officielles de 1969 s’avère très positive, même si des améliorations sont réclamées. En ce qui concerne les initiatives du Secrétariat d’État, les leaders franco-ontariens s’y montrent favorables, tout en surveillant de près les interventions financières et administratives du ministère. En revanche, pour l’encadrement du multiculturalisme élaboré à partir de 1971, c’est le rejet quasi total, celui-ci étant jugé comme un danger pour la promotion du bilinguisme et du biculturalisme. Enfin, l’encadrement de la Charte des droits et libertés suscite des réactions ambivalentes, les leaders franco-ontariens dénonçant le rejet en novembre 1981 de leurs principales recommandations constitutionnelles pour finalement se prévaloir des dispositions juridiques de la Charte pour protéger et promouvoir leurs droits scolaires et autres.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".