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

Comment les Inuvialuit parlent de leur passé1

2003· article· fr· W2116148368 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Murielle Nagy

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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.

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicOral History, Memory, Narrative AnalysisFrench-language works237,207