MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051114308 · doi:10.7202/037523ar

L’émeute de Lachine en 1812 : la coordination d’une contestation populaire1

2009· article· fr· W2051114308 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Christian Dessureault

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire de l Amérique française · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose de revisiter un événement historique déjà étudié, l’émeute de Lachine de 1812, en mettant l’accent sur le rôle, sur le profil social et sur les réseaux de relations des principaux acteurs de cette contestation populaire contre la conscription de miliciens dans l’ouest de l’île de Montréal au début de la guerre de 1812. Les études consacrées à cette émeute ont, malgré leurs divergences sur le bien-fondé de l’action des émeutiers, présenté un monde rural coupé de la ville pourtant proche, de ses idées et de ses réseaux d’information. De plus, ces études ont négligé de manière générale la question du mode d’organisation politique et de la direction de ce type de révoltes populaires. L’opposition des paysans à la conscription était assimilée à une réaction spontanée d’habitants plus ou moins conscients de la portée réelle de leur action. Nous proposons de renverser cette perspective en mettant à l’avant-scène l’étude du groupe d’individus, dont certains sont des membres de l’élite locale, qui assurent la coordination de cette émeute. En somme, nous voulons montrer la dimension organisée et surtout hiérarchisée de cette contestation, de même que son insertion dans des horizons plus larges que celui de la communauté locale.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire de l Amérique françaiseSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207