Le concept de citoyenneté chez des immigrants et des membres de la société d’accueil en milieu minoritaire francophone : une analyse lexicale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Étant donné les changements et les mutations constantes que connaissent les sociétés sur différents plans (social, politique, économique, technologique, etc.), le concept de citoyenneté nécessite une redéfinition d’une manière continue. Si les citoyens francophones, immigrants et membres de la société d’accueil, peuvent se rejoindre grâce à la langue française, ils peuvent différer à cause de leurs autres caractéristiques identitaires à savoir, la culture, l’ethnie, la religion et l’histoire. C’est dans ce sens qu’il importe d’explorer le sens que ces différents groupes donnent aux concepts de citoyen et de participation citoyenne. L’utilisation des outils informatisés et statistiques nous a permis de relever, par un aller-retour constant entre les analyses qualitatives et quantitatives, les ressemblances et les divergences dans le discours de quatre groupes de participants à notre étude : jeunes immigrants, parents immigrants, jeunes de la société d’accueil et parents de la société d’accueil.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".