MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116148368 · doi:10.7202/007055ar

Comment les Inuvialuit parlent de leur passé1

2003· article· fr· W2116148368 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article est une série de réflexions sur la façon dont les Inuvialuit parlent de leur passé et les problèmes associés à l’interprétation des traductions. En analysant des entrevues faites avec des aînés Inuvialuit lors de projets concernant l’histoire orale, nous avons remarqué qu’ils recourent à différentes tournures pour évoquer le passé, et que la langue cible, l’anglais, peine à en restituer les nuances. La remémoration varie selon le genre, utilise des repères spatiaux plutôt que temporels et elle révèle une conception singulière de la prime enfance.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1610.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.260
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.234 · 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