Le Contact interculturel francophone de Sudbury (CIFS) : francophones avant tout! Exemple d’un interculturalisme réussi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organisme communautaire du Nord de l’Ontario, le Contact interculturel francophone de Sudbury (CIFS) a pour mandat l’intégration des nouveaux arrivants francophones ainsi que la promotion de la diversité culturelle francophone. Après dix ans d’existence, son bilan apparaît positif dans la mesure où il a su éviter la réémergence de divisions de type communautariste et atténuer les problèmes de double minorisation. Tous les francophones, quelle que soit leur origine, y ont leur place. En outre, le CIFS, en tant qu’organisme culturel, a su tisser des liens et des partenariats avec les institutions culturelles franco-ontariennes établies. Par là même, il participe au développement d’une culture et d’une identité franco-ontarienne métissée. Cependant, un travail important reste à faire, en particulier envers certaines femmes isolées de tout réseau social ainsi que dans les écoles francophones de la ville qui passent sous silence la diversité culturelle. Pour faire face à ces deux défis, nous proposons le développement d’une garderie parentale interculturelle originale.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".