Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif de cet article est de rendre compte du processus de restructuration politique de l’Association culturelle franco-canadienne de la Saskatchewan (ACFC) entre 1988 et 1999, qui a mené à la création de l’Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise (ACF), une assemblée de députés communautaires élus au suffrage universel parmi la population francophone de la province. Cette étude repose sur une analyse de documents internes de l’ACFC, une revue de presse et 11 entretiens avec des acteurs sociaux de l’époque. En inscrivant l’analyse de ce cas dans le cadre théorique proposé par Fligstein et McAdam dansA Theory of Fields(2012), nous proposons un nouveau regard sur les enjeux de pouvoir des minorités francophones en mettant en lumière, dans le cas fransaskois, l’influence de l’État fédéral, du contexte et des promoteurs de la restructuration, qui ont réussi à mobiliser suffisamment d’acteurs aux intérêts divergents pour faire accepter une nouvelle structure et de nouveaux mécanismes de gouvernance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".