MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792074447 · doi:10.7202/1042319ar

Le désir d’enfant exploré à travers les pratiques de nomination

2017· article· fr· W2792074447 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

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNames, Identity, and Discrimination Research
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesNominationArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans les sociétés occidentales, nommer l’enfant nouveau-né est aujourd’hui une responsabilité dévolue aux parents signataires de la déclaration de naissance, c’est-à-dire à ceux qui ont désiré que cet enfant devienne leur fils ou leur fille. Ce sont eux qui doivent lui transmettre un nom de famille et choisir les prénoms lui conférant une identité propre. À partir de l’analyse de 25 témoignages de parents québécois recueillis en entrevues, cet article explore le lien étroit établi entre désir d’enfant, filiation et nomination. L’analyse des récits sur l’histoire du couple, sur la naissance d’un premier enfant et sur les discussions entourant sa nomination aide à comprendre le sens que les parents donnent à l’enfant et à sa venue, et révèle que ce choix reflue parfois sur le choix du prénom.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.338
GPT teacher head0.617
Teacher spread0.280 · 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