Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’histoire du quotidien, sous ses diverses formes, a investi desproblèmes forts différents selon les époques et les courants. L’histoiredes mentalités à la française demeurait dans l’abstraction, mais d’autres écoles,italienne, allemande ou britannique, proposaient un retour vers l’individu,citoyen banal confronté aux multiples et menues exigences de tous les jours.L’histoire religieuse québécoise ne fut pas à part de cet élan. Explorant lesarchives qui évoquaient la vie ordinaire des paroisses, elle décrivit une religionconcrète, inséparable du jeu général de la sociabilité locale. Une secondehistoire du quotidien est possible cependant, qui cherche non pas à faire sensdes événements les plus habituels, mais entend produire une histoire de lacatégorie et de son incorporation. Il s’agit en fait d’un retour vers la structureet son évolution, celle du temps défini, représenté, expérimenté sur le modede la répétition. Dans cette perspective, l’histoire religieuse a égalementbeaucoup à apporter.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".