MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162630231 · doi:10.7202/1021128ar

Réinterprétation de l’histoire militaire et redéfinition de l’identité nationale

2014· article· fr· W2162630231 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Manuel Dorion-Soulié, Stéphane Roussel

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration PubliqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les commémorations du bicentenaire de la guerre de 1812-1814 organisées par le gouvernement conservateur étonnent par leur ampleur. Ce texte conçoit cette entreprise comme un élément s’inscrivant dans un projet de reconstruction de l’identité nationale et internationale du Canada autour d’une vision du monde néoconservatrice et néocontinentaliste. Toutefois, un examen des commémorations du centenaire de cette même guerre, prévues pour 1915, tend à démontrer que le projet du gouvernement Harper n’est pas unique en son genre et que ce conflit a déjà été réinterprété pour promouvoir une vision alternative de la place du Canada dans le monde, cette fois axée autour de valeurs libérales. En effet, les projets de la Canadian Peace Centenary Association visaient à célébrer la communauté identitaire unissant les « peuples de langue anglaise » et la paix qui règne en Amérique du Nord grâce aux méthodes rationnelles de résolution des conflits, notamment en proposant un programme d’éducation des peuples. Ce faisant, la cpca véhiculait une conception alternative aux idées impérialistes dominantes à l’époque et préfigurait l’émergence d’une conception plus nationaliste de la place du Canada dans le monde.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207