Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article vise à explorer la relation entre l’éclatement linguistique de Montréal et les caractéristiques de la couverture journalistique des Jeux olympiques. L’hypothèse initiale, selon laquelle la couverture de l’événement varierait selon la langue des différents journaux étudiés, ne se vérifie pas dans le traitement des cinq thèmes principaux (race, politique internationale, organisation sportive, esprit sportif et sport féminin) qui traversent les discours. Cependant, l’examen de l’iconographie révèle que les journaux francophones et anglophones s’appuient sur des imaginaires différents, les premiers accordant une place importante à des images tendant à vedettiser les athlètes alors que les seconds proposent plutôt des images du corps sportif. La couverture des Jeux des journaux montréalais n’apparaît donc pas fortement différenciée selon la langue.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".