Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que la sociologie de l’homosexualité demeure une spécialité peu développée, la diversification des sociétés contemporaines appelle une théorisation attentive à l’égard des multiples dimensions des expériences des immigrants homosexuels. Nous présentons ici un dialogue entre les approches qui constituent les a priori théoriques de notre recherche, en nous appuyant sur les résultats de nos cinq premières entrevues. Cette partie de notre recherche est basée sur des entrevues semi-directives réalisées auprès d’immigrants homosexuels au Québec. Il est montré que les approches interactionniste et historiciste ont permis de comprendre l’homosexualité comme un processus sociohistorique. Mais l’interaction entre les axes de différenciation sociale nous pousse à conjuguer ces approches à une théorisation intersectionnelle qui intègre explicitement les multiples dimensions de l’expérience sociale. Nous discutons toutefois de possibles difficultés méthodologiques.
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 | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".