MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2243820894 · doi:10.82308/39086

Se creer des ancetres. : les ecrits historiques et genealogiques des de Forest et des Forest d'Amerique du Nord, 19e et 20e siecles

2001· article· fr· W2243820894 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Caroline‐Isabelle Caron

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAncestorFamily treePopularityBourgeoisieGenealogyNarrativeHistoryEthnologyGloryPeriod (music)AnthropologyHumanitiesSociologyArtArchaeologyLiteratureAestheticsPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines the exercise of genealogy in North America in the 19th and 20th centuries through an analysis of the historical and genealogical writings by and about the (real and presumed) descendants of two Walloon brothers, Jesse (c 1580--1624) and Gerard de Forest (1583--1654). It also follows genealogy's slow democratization, from its late 19th century bourgeois users to the explosion of its popularity since 1977. A thorough theoretical base was needed to compensate for the absence of historical studies on the subject. The thesis then follows the construction over the course of 140 years of the de Forest and Forest historical narrative, through the successive publications of various versions of this story, fundamentally one of identity. From research project to research project, these genealogists were influenced by the time period, the social, cultural, and commemorative settings in which they wrote, in New England, New York, Acadia, Quebec, Louisiana, and Ontario. Their research techniques, their processes for acquiring and exchanging knowledge, and the manner in which they wrote their narratives, revealed their aspirations, their self-representations, those of their families and their ancestors, as well as their gender, class, and ethnicity. Their ancestor biographies showed a desire to make public the true history of their ancestors, for their family's glory, whether or not their ancestry was real or invented. In the hope of unifying the family, boaster the popularity of a famous ancestor or of an interest group, these genealogists constructed histories based on oral traditions, primary sources, and in response to the works of their predecessors. Through the years, the material conditions of genealogical research and publication changed greatly, particularly with the advent of computing, but the most important influences on genealogy writing have been the feminisation of genealogists, the multiplication of descendants willing to write, and the chao

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→