Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le combat contre l’exclusion prend pour les organisateurs communautaires une forme originale dans les débats identitaires contemporains. L’enjeu n’est plus seulement de soutenir les différents groupes d’exclus dans leur quête d’ empowerment , mais également de nourrir les points de contact entre les revendications de ces groupes et un système qui s’efface au fur et à mesure que l’État se désengage. Cet article vise à examiner les possibilités et les impasses que la reconnaissance des différences pose aux intellectuels et aux intervenants oeuvrant avec des communautés identitaires comme celle des Sourds. Comment être à la fois respectueux des différences sans tomber dans certains pièges du différentialisme ? Cette question, qui appelle une position mitoyenne, ouvre sur un compromis nécessaire entre les conceptions communautarienne et intégrationniste concernant la place des Sourds au Québec.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".