MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073679855 · doi:10.7202/305054ar

Quand éditer, c’était agir

2008· article· fr· W2073679855 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Pierre Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire de l Amérique française · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De tous les moyens d'action mis en oeuvre par la Ligue des droits du français, la revue L'Action française (1917) désigne celui qui s'est vu jusqu'à présent accorder le plus d'attention. Pourtant, en 1918, la Ligue se lançait dans une entreprise d'édition, la Bibliothèque de l'Action française, qui publiera quatre-vingt-neuf titres. Ce phénomène a été jusqu'à maintenant négligé, même si l'éditeur représente une médiation essentielle dans la saisie du fait littéraire. Cette étude vise à cerner les stratégies et politiques de la Bibliothèque, le rôle joué par Lionel Groulx et, enfin, les causes et circonstances du déclin de la Bibliothèque de l'Action française et de la naissance de la Librairie d'Action canadienne-française (1928), dirigée par Albert Lévesque.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.008

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire de l Amérique françaiseSame topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207