MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Legacy of New France : Law and Social Cohesion between Quebec and the Illinois Country, 1763–1790

2017· article· fr· W2766365359 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Englebert

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Colonial History · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologyHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract En 1763, le traité de Paris a mis fin à la guerre de Sept Ans. Ce traité amena des changements géopolitiques profonds car il transféra les colonies du vaste empire français d’Amérique septentrionale aux Anglais, aux Espagnols et, plus tard, aux Américains. Dans les années qui suivirent la fin du conflit, l’incertitude politique provoqua d’ailleurs beaucoup d’inquiétude parmi les créoles français de l’intérieur du continent, surtout concernant la préservation de leurs droits de propriétés et de leurs droits civils. Les créoles français adressèrent donc de nombreuses pétitions pour s’assurer de la reconnaissance de leurs droits comme sujets et citoyens. Il reste toutefois à mieux comprendre comment les anciennes lois françaises furent préservées, voire renforcées, sous les nouveaux régimes impériaux. Cet article examine comment les créoles français ont utilisé la loi de l’Ancien régime (la coutume de paris) et, en particulier, la procuration, pour gérer leurs successions familiales entre le pays des Illinois et le Canada après la guerre de Sept Ans. Il démontre qu’en faisant appel à cette loi pour préserver leurs propriétés familiales, les créoles français ont réussi à maintenir une cohésion sociale en Amérique française, cohésion qui s’étendait bien au-delà des nouvelles frontières coloniales.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrench Colonial HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207