MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999031956 · doi:10.3917/pox.077.0039

Économie morale du pèlerinage et société civile en Iran : les voyages religieux, commerciaux et touristiques à Damas

2007· article· fr· W1999031956 on OpenAlexaff
Fariba Adelkhah

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitix · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le pèlerinage est une pratique religieuse centrale dans l’islam. Mais sous ce constat banal se cache une grande complexité sociale et historique. D’une part, le pèlerinage n’est pas un phénomène atemporel. Il est situé dans le temps et bien sûr dans l’espace. D’autre part, il comporte des aspects extra-religieux, mondains ou profanes. Cette complexité fait du pèlerinage une pratique politique notable. L’observation participante d’un voyage de pèlerins téhéranais aux lieux saints chiites de Damas et Alep, en juillet 2003, permet de dégager le rôle que les femmes y exercent désormais, à la fois sur les plans de la religiosité et du commerce à la valise, et les conséquences sociales qui en découlent du point de vue des relations de genre, de l’autonomisation des rapports marchands eu égard au pouvoir politique et des processus d’individuation. L’expérience religieuse, tout en gardant sa transcendance et son irréductibilité, va de pair avec l’omniprésence du calcul économique rationnel : le pèlerinage est moins l’actualisation d’une communitas de croyants que la constitution d’un champ de pratiques et de luttes sociales, dans le double contexte de la nation et de la globalisation.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

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 studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitixSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207