MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047416405 · doi:10.7202/014028ar

La représentation des immigrants dans l’espace muséal et patrimonial de Québec

2007· article· fr· W2047416405 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nada Guzin Lukić

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnologies · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jusqu’à quel point et de quelle manière les immigrants d’hier et d’aujourd’hui partagent-ils l’espace public culturel au Québec ? Les enjeux de l’exclusion/inclusion sont rythmés par l’évolution de la définition même de l’identité québécoise et du patrimoine qui la symbolise. Comment les immigrants sont-ils représentés : d’une manière individuelle ou/et collective ? Sont-ils intégrés ou séparés, passifs ou actifs, sont-ils liés plutôt à leur communauté d’origine ou à leur expérience québécoise ? Par l’analyse des expositions Mémoires et Le Temps des Québécois , portant sur le thème de l’identité, présentées au Musée de la civilisation de Québec, cet article se propose d’interroger les représentations des immigrants et les stratégies actuelles de la médiation interculturelle.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnologiesSame topicCultural Identity and HeritageFrench-language works237,207