MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3042166892 · doi:10.71781/8185

La couverture de la crise soudanaise dans la presse montréalaise, 1885-1904

2019· dissertation· fr· W3042166892 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alex Hubert

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire porte sur la couverture de la crise soudanaise par la presse montréalaise de la fin du XIXe siècle. Cette étude comparative des narrations de la rivalité anglo-française en Afrique que construisent La Presse et le Montreal Daily Star met en valeur, dans le contexte québécois, deux cultures politiques coexistantes : l’impérialisme et le nationalisme. Le point de départ de ce mémoire se situe en 1885 avec la première mention, dans La Presse, des interventions britanniques au Soudan qui mèneront à la crise de Fachoda en 1898 et il se termine à la signature de l’Entente cordiale de 1904, qui marque la résolution des principaux conflits impériaux entre le Royaume-Uni et la France. Cette recherche conclut, d’une part, que le Montreal Daily Star montre une culture politique anglophone adossée à l’impérialisme canadien et britannique, une perspective dont la prégnance s’accentue tout au long de la période étudiée. Au contraire, La Presse se distancie progressivement de ce courant et révèle plutôt l’affirmation d’un nationalisme canadien.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→