Relations Nord-Sud, altérité et pratiques de loisir : l’exemple du canoë en Zambie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une enquête sur les usages sociaux du canoë en Afrique australe, cet article entend souligner les traits problématiques caractérisant les relations sociales qui se nouent entre pratiquants européens et « populations locales ». Si l’organisation de l’activité a été importée par des Anglais dans les pays du Sud, canoéistes et habitants entrent peu en interaction en dehors de la pratique des loisirs. En étudiant l’altérité, il s’agit de caractériser le canoë afin de saisir l’émergence de modes d’appréhension de l’Autre dans le cadre de ce loisir en France et en Zambie. La singularité des relations sociales qui se nouent entre populations occidentales et africaines durant l’activité pose la question de la différence culturelle. Les modes de structuration du canoë constituent ainsi un révélateur des rapports toujours ambivalents entre pays du Nord et pays du Sud.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".