MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073938787 · doi:10.7202/011987ar

Les voix de la ville revisitées. Sociolinguistique urbaine ou linguistique de la ville ?

2006· article· fr· W2073938787 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic and Sociocultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 1994, la sociolinguistique s'est principalement penchée sur le terrain urbain, au point qu'on a pu se demander s'il n'y avait pas là un lien de nécessité, si la ville n'était pas le terrain par excellence de l'approche sociale des faits de langue. L'exploration de ce questionnement nous mènera, bien sûr, à parcourir les avancées de la science depuis dix ans, mais aussi à nous interroger sur les différentes visions de la ville qui apparaissent dans les diverses publications et sur les différents choix de villes : une analyse d'une ville africaine ou asiatique très plurilingue ne mène pas nécessairement aux mêmes retombées théoriques que celle d'une ville européenne plus unifiée linguistiquement. Enfin, on s'interrogera sur la pertinence de l'opposition linguistique / sociolinguistique en prenant le ville comme pierre de touche.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.261 · 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