MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166071703 · doi:10.7202/039397ar

Écrire le passé au Québec: de l’amertume au pardon

2010· article· fr· W2166071703 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Pierre-Yves Mocquais

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers franco-canadiens de l Ouest · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mémoire, oubli, manipulation et recherche du pardon, au départ manifestations individuelles, sont devenus des phénomènes collectifs. La mémoire est en effet devenue une obsession quasi universelle de nos sociétés modernes. C’est dans ce contexte que se situent nos remarques sur deux énoncés à première vue disparates, la devise du Québec «Je me souviens» et la toute première phrase de La détresse et l’enchantement, l’autobiographie de Gabrielle Roy: «Quand donc ai-je pris conscience pour la première fois que j’étais, dans mon pays, d’une espèce destinée à être traitée en inférieure?» Ces deux énoncés affirment-ils une prise de position par rapport au passé et par rapport à la mémoire de ce passé, prise de position au sein de laquelle se mêleraient appel au souvenir, organisation ou réorganisation de ce souvenir, revendication de ce qui put un temps être un oubli et peut-être regret? Ces énoncés constituent-ils des actes de revendication ou au contraire d’apaisement, de mort ou au contraire d’amour? Nous posons dans cet article que regret et amertume l’emportent dans le cas de l’autobiographie de Gabrielle Roy alors que la devise matriculaire québécoise est devenue au fil des ans une proclamation d’amour de chaque Québécois pour le 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 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers franco-canadiens de l OuestSame topicDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningFrench-language works237,207