MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2513465653 · doi:10.7202/1036376ar

Méconnaissance

2016· article· fr· W2513465653 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Greg M. Nielsen, Simon Arsenault, François Langevin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tout en admettant que la pauvreté est abondamment couverte dans la presse grand public canadienne et américaine, le présent article soutient que du fait que le journalisme emploie une narration à la troisième personne, les acteurs des récits sont rarement reconnus comme faisant partie du « public implicite ». Ainsi, les plus démunis ne sont pas en mesure de dialoguer directement avec le journaliste, ce qui mène à une forme de méconnaissance de premier niveau de la part des communs urbains. Cet argument est appuyé par des exemples tirés d’une étude exhaustive de la couverture journalistique de quotidiens grand public canadiens et américains en 2010. Des suggestions sont formulées quant à la manière dont le passage de la troisième à la deuxième personne influe sur le public implicite et la culture professionnelle du journaliste. Une glose est présentée à titre d’introduction aux relations entre la communauté et les ressources matérielles qui constituent les communs urbains, à leur sphère d’information et au lien conceptuel entre les deux niveaux de reconnaissance qui orientent l’argument.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.013
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.003

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.321 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et Sociétés→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→