Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le fonctionnement de tout État est caractérisé par un équilibre plus ou moins stable entre des forces centrifuges et des forces centripètes. Ces forces se résument pour ainsi dire dans le nationalisme et le régionalisme. L'État canadien, né en 1867, n'a pas su assumer le nationalisme canadien-français et le nationalisme canadien-anglais dans un nationalisme supérieur, le nationalisme canadien. Il en est résulté un choc entre ces deux nationalismes, qui a eu pour effet de transformer le nationalisme canadien-français en un nationalisme québécois, qui réclame aujourd'hui la souveraineté politique complète du Québec. À cette première force centrifuge, s'ajoute celle des régionalismes. L'histoire, la géographie, l'économie favorisaient l'éclosion de régionalismes marqués au Canada. L'évolution politique, tant du côté fédéral que provincial, les a durcis en oppositions presque irréductibles. Ces deux forces combinées menacent l'existence d'un pays qui, par beaucoup d'autres aspects, est une réussite géographique.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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".