MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760607066 · doi:10.7202/1039317ar

Le Principe du limaçon ou la résistance des marges. Essai d’interprétation de la dynamique des traditions

2017· article· fr· W2760607066 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Pierre Pichette

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennes · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Studies and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsUniversité Sainte-Anne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jean-Pierre Pichette reprend le fil de l’enquête qu’il a menée sur la sanction de l’aîné célibataire, une pratique qui a profondément marqué le rituel du mariage franco-ontarien. Considérant sa vitalité dans les régions périphériques, opposée à son déclin dans les zones centrales qui en suggère la continuité improbable, l’auteur confirme la résistance de la tradition dans les marges, phénomène qu’il avait auparavant observé en littérature orale. Dès lors, sur cette base élargie, il expose, en guise d’interprétation des dynamiques en présence, le « principe du limaçon », un modèle tout simple capable d’apporter un éclairage original et significatif sur les rapports entre centre et périphérie, sur les possibles croisements ou l’origine plurielle des traditions ; il tente ainsi de cerner les facteurs de leur maintien ou de leur érosion en cherchant pourquoi les marges retiennent mieux et plus longtemps certains des messages transmis qui s’érodent au centre, et comment ce dernier en assure néanmoins la sauvegarde. Sans être universelle, cette proposition, que l’auteur livre comme réflexion finale à son enquête, se vérifie dans plusieurs cas de transfert culturel et elle appelle d’autres investigations afin d’en démonter le mécanisme complexe, délicat et capricieux.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennesSame topicAfrican Studies and EthnographyFrench-language works237,207