MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606474050 · doi:10.7202/1039131ar

Gouvernance linguistique et démocratie : la participation des minorités de langue officielle à la vie publique au Canada

2017· article· fr· W2606474050 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Gouvernance · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le thème de la participation des minorités nationales et linguistiques à la vie démocratique et à la prise de décision remonte aux années 1990. En Europe, celui-ci survient à la suite de l’éclatement du bloc soviétique. La question du respect des droits de la personne et des minorités dans les nouvelles démocraties interpelle les pouvoirs publics, notamment l’Organisation pour la sécurité et la coopération en Europe (OSCE) qui crée, en 1992, le poste de Haut Commissaire de l’OSCE pour les minorités nationales. En 1999, les Recommandations de Lund sur la participation effective des minorités nationales à la vie publique ont constitué une autre réponse à ce défi. Au Canada, le thème de la participation des minorités est particulièrement important dans le domaine des langues officielles et des rapports entre anglophones et francophones. Ce texte propose un premier cadre conceptuel afin d’évaluer la qualité de cette participation. Il conclut que celle-ci manque d’une certaine clarté opératoire et propose un certain nombre de recommandations afin d’y remédier.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · 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