Marcel Trudel et Guy Frégault : regards sur une amitié intellectuelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article retrace les fils de l’amitié intellectuelle entre Marcel Trudel et Guy Frégault, deux historiens majeurs du renouveau historiographique québécois d’après-guerre. Son but particulier consiste à montrer en quoi cette amitié, notamment mise en évidence dans leurs correspondances personnelles et certaines collaborations, a été scellée autour d’une puissante prise de conscience générationnelle et à travers l’adhésion à une même configuration historiographique, celle de l’« histoire critique », dont ils se sont tous deux fait les ardents promoteurs au cours des décennies 1940 et 1950. En explicitant les ressorts et les déterminants de cette relation d’amitié, l’analyse met à l’épreuve le schéma d’explication – commode, mais forcément réducteur – offert par la querelle des écoles historiques entre Montréal et Québec. De même, elle permet de jauger autrement la complexité des aspirations et des attentes spécifiques qui se condensent chez les jeunes historiens laïques du Québec de l’immédiat après-guerre.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".