MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998596131 · doi:10.7202/304813ar

L’agriculture saguenayenne entre 1840 et 1950 : l’évolution de la technologie

2008· article· fr· W1998596131 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gérard Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire de l Amérique française · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte propose une synthèse de l’évolution de la technologie agraire (procédés ou techniques, équipements, rendements) au Saguenay entre 1840 et 1950. Il fait ressortir, en particulier : a) sur de nombreux points, le caractère « primitif » de la technologie, aux premières décennies de la colonisation (1840/1885-90); b) l’existence de deux démarrages agraires, entrecoupés d’une sorte de plateau. Le premier démarrage survint entre 1885-90 et 1905-10, le deuxième à l’époque de la Seconde Guerre mondiale; c) les écarts plus ou moins durables qui se creusent entre nouvelles et anciennes aires de colonisation à l’intérieur de la région - écarts imputés à un phénomène qui est ici qualifié de régression, propre aux fronts pionniers; d) les écarts qui se marquent également à l’échelle interrégionale, entre le Saguenay et les terroirs de la vallée du Saint-Laurent. L’auteur insiste aussi sur les continuités qu’on observe au Québec, à des périodes différentes, entre anciennes et nouvelles régions, du fait des caractéristiques communes aux fronts pionniers. On rappelle enfin les difficultés méthodologiques reliées à ce genre de comparaisons interrégionales, dans un cadre chronologique variable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire de l Amérique françaiseSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207