Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis la dislocation du Canada français dans les années 1960, une divergence se creuse entre ses éléments. Alors que la vitalité du français, langue principale à la maison, se renforce au Québec et au Nouveau-Brunswick, elle s’affaiblit ailleurs au Canada. De même, elle progresse à Montréal, Moncton et Gatineau mais recule à Toronto, Sudbury et Ottawa. Les données inédites du recensement de 2001 touchant les langues secondaires au foyer indiquent en outre que le comportement bilingue est le plus souvent de nature additive parmi les francophones du Québec et du Nouveau-Brunswick, tandis qu’il joue le rôle d’étape transitoire vers l’anglicisation dans les autres provinces. En parallèle avec la cassure en matière de comportement linguistique, il s’est développé une divergence identitaire : au contraire des jeunes de langue maternelle française du Québec et du Nouveau-Brunswick, ceux de l’Ontario et des autres provinces s’identifient comme bilingues plutôt que francophones.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".