MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904426750 · doi:10.7202/1054053ar

Langues parlées au sein du ménage et assimilation linguistique au Bénin

2018· article· fr· W2904426750 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers québécois de démographie · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic and Sociocultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Par comparaison de l’appartenance ethnique et la principale langue parlée au sein du ménage tel que déclarée au recensement de la population de 2013, cet article examine l’assimilation linguistique au Bénin. Son taux est estimé à 7 % dans le pays. Phénomène quasi urbain, il affecte tous les groupes ethniques à l’extérieur de leurs aires d’implantation, mais plus souvent les personnes non apparentées au chef de ménage, soupçonnant le rôle des migrations. Le fon, qui assimile systématiquement l’adja et le yoruba en recul est la véritable langue en expansion. Le dendi assimile également les langues nationales du Nord-Bénin, avec une légère expansion. Mais si l’assimilation linguistique s’accomplit vers le fon ou le dendi, elle l’est sûrement aussi vers le français ; c’est la première langue d’assimilation des personnes non apparentées au chef dans les ménages des agglomérations urbaines. Une analyse approfondie centrée sur l’âge et le sexe permettra plus d’éclairage sur les facteurs de ce phénomène.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.288 · 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