MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560584238 · doi:10.7202/1037877ar

La contribution des conservateurs à la longue survie des organisations fascistes d’Adrien Arcand. Un élément d’explication

2016· article· fr· W2560584238 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jonathan Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobe Revue internationale d’études québécoises · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De 1929 jusqu’à sa mort en 1967, Adrien Arcand assume la direction de l’Ordre patriotique des goglus (1929-1934), du Parti national social-chrétien (1934-1938) et du Parti de l’Unité nationale du Canada (1938-1940, 1947-1958, 1965-1967). Pendant ce temps, il publie plusieurs journaux, dont Le Goglu (1929-1933), Le Miroir (1929-1933), Le Chameau (1930-1932), Le Patriote (1933-1938), Le Fasciste canadien (1935-1938), Le Combat national (1938-1939), L’Unité nationale (1953-1958) et Serviam (1965-2001). Pour financer ses médias et ses mouvements politiques constamment déficitaires, Arcand se comporte comme un véritable mercenaire en rendant deux sortes de services aux conservateurs qui consentent à lui verser des subsides. Il leur offre en tout premier lieu ses talents d’éditorialiste en soutenant constamment leur politique dans ses journaux. Il demande, en second lieu, à ses disciples fascistes de militer en faveur de leur parti politique lors des campagnes électorales. C’est en concluant ce genre d’accords avec les principaux ténors du Parti conservateur du Canada et de l’Union nationale qu’Adrien Arcand a pu mener en toute impunité sa campagne antisémite et fasciste pendant plus de trente ans.

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)0.005
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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 venueGlobe Revue internationale d’études québécoisesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207