MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507249876 · doi:10.7202/1037175ar

Gabrielle Roy et le régime seigneurial au Québec (1941)

2016· article· fr· W2507249876 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Benoît Grenier

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers franco-canadiens de l Ouest · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Février 1941: Gabrielle Roy n’a pas encore amorcé sa carrière de romancière. Alors reporter, elle publie dansLe Bulletin des agriculteursun article intitulé «Mort d’extrême vieillesse». La future auteure propose une lecture journalistique d’un fait alors contemporain. Au début de la décennie 1940, la propriété seigneuriale n’est pas affaire du passé dans la province de Québec. Le reportage de Roy se veut à la fois historique et didactique et s’appuie sur certains témoignages de «vieux habitants». L’auteure y est très critique à l’égard de cette «vénérable» institution que les historiens de son temps encensent. Elle nous rappelle que, près d’un siècle après l’abolition du régime seigneurial (1854), «nous éprouvons encore les derniers effets du régime colonial qu’il [Richelieu] nous imposa il y a plus de trois cents ans». Il faudra attendre les années 1970, alors que la question seigneuriale ne sera toujours pas réglée, pour que des historiens adoptent une telle position. Le présent article s’emploiera à montrer que ce texte de Gabrielle Roy n’a rien d’anodin et qu’elle s’y révèle une observatrice perspicace d’un événement passé sous le radar mais pourtant crucial dans l’histoire du Québec moderne: l’ultime extinction des rapports «seigneurs/censitaires».

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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers franco-canadiens de l OuestSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207