MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106102074 · doi:10.1080/09639480801975925

Understanding 1968 – The Case of Brest

2008· article· en· W2106102074 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueModern & Contemporary France · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunism, Protests, Social Movements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Latin AmericansHistorySociologyPolitical scienceLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the dominance of Paris in how May '68 has been portrayed over the years. It will be argued, through a case-study of the revolt in the Breton city of Brest, that the Paris-centred approach is one that belies the true nationwide aspect of May/June 1968. As one of a range of characteristics, the concentration on the Latin Quarter has helped mould what Kristin Ross has described as the 'official history' of 1968. An examination of how the events were played out within different regional contexts would go a long way towards helping overcome the shortcomings of the increasingly narrow portrayal that has come to dominate the stereotypical image of 1968.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.044 · 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