MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071924656 · doi:10.7202/015219ar

La question du " genre " à Samoa. De l'illusion dualiste à la hiérarchie des niveaux

2003· article· fr· W2071924656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Serge Tcherkézoff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question du * genre " à Samoa De l'illusion dualiste à la hiérarchie des niveaux Le modèle anthropologique d'une " société " est une hiérarchie de relations. Une fois mis au jour, on peut lui soumettre des questions importées, comme celle de l'organisation-représen-tation de la différence des sexes ou gender, laissant ainsi ouverte la possibilité que la question elle-même soit interprétée à différents niveaux. La méthode classique se contente au contraire d'empiler par analogie les éléments " masculins " contre les éléments " féminins ", oblitérant la variation possible des modes de représentation d'une opposition, aussi universelle soit-elle. La méthode " hiérarchique " révèle que, à Samoa, la femme représente un fait social total à un niveau, celui du monde social intérieur, et qu'elle peut ainsi englober le gender masculin. Mais, à un autre niveau, la femme court le risque d'être placée parforce à " l'extérieur " et de subir une loi masculine exprimée en termes d'inégalité " fort/faible ". La frontière entre les deux niveaux est définie par la sexualité. Ceci explique incidemment une partie des malentendus qui concernent le débat autour de l'analyse ancienne de Margaret Mead.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.025
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207