Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis quelques années, on assiste à un regain d’intérêt pour la noblesse canadienne en Nouvelle-France. Les attributs et comportements démographiques de ce groupe social sont maintenant connus, alors que leurs pratiques culturelles nous sont peu familières. Afin de mieux cerner certaines de ces pratiques, cet article étudie la présence du livre dans la noblesse canadienne entre 1670 et 1764. À partir d’un corpus documentaire de 276 actes notariés, principalement des inventaires après décès, et selon les méthodes quantitatives développées par les historiens français du livre, le texte identifie le nombre et l’importance des collections d’imprimés, les lieux de conservation et la nature de ces collections. Il propose aussi d’examiner sommairement l’usage que les nobles font de leurs livres. Cet article vise finalement à démontrer que les nobles canadiens se distinguent de l’ensemble de la population de la Nouvelle-France en matière de culture livresque.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".