MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035852689 · doi:10.7202/055772ar

La colonisation équivoque

2005· article· fr· W2035852689 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christian Morissonneau

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article cherche à retrouver les significations des mouvements de colonisation québécois au XIXe siècle. Les interprétations semblent rendre univoque ce phénomène aux multiples aspects. L'article ne retient pas les seules finalités agricoles et forestières. Les conduites des colons et le discours d'un leader colonisateur sont examinés. Le colon n'est pas tant vu comme agriculteur ou bûcheron que comme participant d'une tradition de mobilité (coureur de bois, voyageur, forestier, colon), c'est-à-dire du nomadisme québécois (dichotomie colon/habitant ou forêt/terre). La logique interne du mouvement est analysée à travers les idées de l'abbé Provost (1860-1880) sur l'ouverture de la Mattawinie (nord de Joliette, dans les Laurentides). On y trouve un plan d'occupation du territoire et de développement économique qui permet de critiquer l'étiquetage « agriculturiste » des leaders de la colonisation. Trois composantes principales se dégagent de ces idées : une stratégie géopolitique, un projet religieux, un développement économique par étapes.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sociographiquesSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207